Multiparametric 3D<i>in vivo</i>ultrasound vibroelastography imaging of prostate cancer: Preliminary results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Ultrasound-based solutions for diagnosis and prognosis of prostate cancer are highly desirable. The authors have devised a method for detecting prostate cancer using a vibroelastography (VE) system developed in our group and a tissue classification approach based on texture analysis of VE images. METHODS: The VE method applies wide-band mechanical vibrations to the tissue. Here, the authors report on the use of this system for cancer detection and show that the texture of VE images characterized by the first and the second order statistics of the pixel intensities form a promising set of features for tissue typing to detect prostate cancer. The system was used to image patients prior to radical surgery. The removed specimens were sectioned and studied by an experienced histopathologist. The authors registered the whole-mount histology sections to the ultrasound images using an automatic registration algorithm. This enabled the quantitative evaluation of the performance of the authors' imaging method in cancer detection in an unbiased manner. The authors used support vector machine (SVM) classification to measure the cancer detection performance of the VE method. Regions of tissue of size 5 × 5 mm, labeled as cancer and noncancer based on automatic registration to histology slides, were classified using SVM. RESULTS: The authors report an area under ROC of 0.81 ± 0.10 in cancer detection on 1066 tissue regions from 203 images. All cancer tumors in all zones were included in this analysis and were classified versus the noncancer tissue in the peripheral zone. This outcome was obtained in leave-one-patient-out validation. CONCLUSIONS: The developed 3D prostate vibroelastography system and the proposed multiparametric approach based on statistical texture parameters from the VE images result in a promising cancer detection method.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".