Prostate: Registration of Digital Histopathologic Images to in Vivo MR Images Acquired by Using Endorectal Receive Coil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To develop and evaluate a technique for the registration of in vivo prostate magnetic resonance (MR) images to digital histopathologic images by using image-guided specimen slicing based on strand-shaped fiducial markers relating specimen imaging to histopathologic examination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was approved by the institutional review board (the University of Western Ontario Health Sciences Research Ethics Board, London, Ontario, Canada), and written informed consent was obtained from all patients. This work proposed and evaluated a technique utilizing developed fiducial markers and real-time three-dimensional visualization in support of image guidance for ex vivo prostate specimen slicing parallel to the MR imaging planes prior to digitization, simplifying the registration process. Means, standard deviations, root-mean-square errors, and 95% confidence intervals are reported for all evaluated measurements. RESULTS: The slicing error was within the 2.2 mm thickness of the diagnostic-quality MR imaging sections, with a tissue block thickness standard deviation of 0.2 mm. Rigid registration provided negligible postregistration overlap of the smallest clinically important tumors (0.2 cm(3)) at histologic examination and MR imaging, whereas the tested nonrigid registration method yielded a mean target registration error of 1.1 mm and provided useful coregistration of such tumors. CONCLUSION: This method for the registration of prostate digital histopathologic images to in vivo MR images acquired by using an endorectal receive coil was sufficiently accurate for coregistering the smallest clinically important lesions with 95% confidence.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".