MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2413452454

CT imaging of angiogenesis.

2003· article· en· W2413452454 on OpenAlex
Lee Ty, Thomas G. Purdie, Errol Stewart

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMRI in cancer diagnosis
Canadian institutionsLawson Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAngiogenesisBlood flowBiomedical engineeringVascular permeabilityBlood volumeNuclear medicineMedicineComputer sciencePathologyRadiologyCardiologyInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tumor angiogenesis has significant implications in the diagnosis and treatment of various solid tumors. With the advent of fast, multi-slice CT scanners, CT imaging techniques capable of qualitative and quantitative analysis of tumor angiogenesis have been the subject of extensive investigation in the past 2 decades. The fundamental bases for CT imaging of angiogenesis are both the transport by blood flow of intravenously administered iodinated contrast material to tissue and the exchange by diffusion of these contrast molecules between the intravascular space and the extravascular interstitial space. With current fast CT scanners both tissue and vascular enhancement can be measured and traced over time at small time intervals to allow detailed modeling of the distribution of contrast agent in tissue. Both compartmental and distributed parameter models for contrast transport and exchange have been developed to quantify from the CT data the following angiogenesis related parameters: tissue blood flow, blood volume, mean transit time, contrast arrival time, capillary permeability surface area product and hepatic arterial fraction in case of the liver. This review addresses the following aspects of CT imaging of angiogenesis: 1) basic concepts related to the understanding of both compartmental and distributed parameter models; 2) comparison between both types of models; 3) practical issues with respect to the measurement of the arterial input function, which is required for the solution of both types of models; and, 4) illustration of the application of a distributed parameter model, the Johnson and Wilson model, in a number of experimental studies.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations168
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicMRI in cancer diagnosisFrench-language works237,207