Coregistered FDG PET/CT-Based Textural Characterization of Head and Neck Cancer for Radiation Treatment Planning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coregistered fluoro-deoxy-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) has shown potential to improve the accuracy of radiation targeting of head and neck cancer (HNC) when compared to the use of CT simulation alone. The objective of this study was to identify textural features useful in distinguishing tumor from normal tissue in head and neck via quantitative texture analysis of coregistered 18F-FDG PET and CT images. Abnormal and typical normal tissues were manually segmented from PET/CT images of 20 patients with HNC and 20 patients with lung cancer. Texture features including some derived from spatial grey-level dependence matrices (SGLDM) and neighborhood gray-tone-difference matrices (NGTDM) were selected for characterization of these segmented regions of interest (ROIs). Both K nearest neighbors (KNNs) and decision tree (DT)-based KNN classifiers were employed to discriminate images of abnormal and normal tissues. The area under the curve (AZ) of receiver operating characteristics (ROC) was used to evaluate the discrimination performance of features in comparison to an expert observer. The leave-one-out and bootstrap techniques were used to validate the results. The AZ of DT-based KNN classifier was 0.95. Sensitivity and specificity for normal and abnormal tissue classification were 89% and 99%, respectively. In summary, NGTDM features such as PET Coarseness, PET Contrast, and CT Coarseness extracted from FDG PET/CT images provided good discrimination performance. The clinical use of such features may lead to improvement in the accuracy of radiation targeting of HNC.
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 | 0.000 | 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".