Comparison of dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI and dynamic contrast‐enhanced CT biomarkers in bladder cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) is frequently used to provide response biomarkers in clinical trials of novel cancer therapeutics but assessment of their physiological accuracy is difficult. DCE-CT provides an independent probe of similar pharmacokinetic processes and may be modeled in the same way as DCE-MRI to provide purportedly equivalent physiological parameters. In this study, DCE-MRI and DCE-CT were directly compared in subjects with primary bladder cancer to assess the degree to which the model parameters report modeled physiology rather than artefacts of the measurement technique and to determine the interchangeability of the techniques in a clinical trial setting. The biomarker K(trans) obtained by fitting an extended version of the Kety model voxelwise to both DCE-MRI and DCE-CT data was in excellent agreement (mean across subjects was 0.085 ± 0.030 min(-1) for DCE-MRI and 0.087 ± 0.033 min(-1) for DCE-CT, intermodality coefficient of variation 9%). The parameter v(p) derived from DCE-CT was significantly greater than that derived from DCE-MRI (0.018 ± 0.006 compared to 0.009 ± 0.008, P = 0.0007) and v(e) was in reasonable agreement only for low values. The study provides evidence that the biomarker K(trans) is a robust parameter indicative of the underlying physiology and relatively independent of the method of measurement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".