MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2460429935 · doi:10.1162/15353500200504181

An Interventional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Technique for the Molecular Characterization of Intraprostatic Dynamic Contrast Enhancement

2005· article· en· W2460429935 on OpenAlexaff
Cynthia Ménard, Robert C. Susil, Peter L. Choyke, Jonathan Coleman, Robert L. Grubb, Ahmed M. Gharib, Axel Krieger, Peter Guion, David Thomasson, Karen Ullman, Sandeep Gupta, Virginia Espina, Lance A. Liotta, Emanuel Petricoin, Gabor Fitchtinger, Louis L. Whitcomb, Ergin Atalar, C. Norman Coleman, Kevin Camphausen

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Imaging · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringForskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och Välfärd
KeywordsMagnetic resonance imagingDynamic contrastProstate cancerMolecular imagingMagnetic resonance spectroscopic imagingBiopsyContrast (vision)CancerRadiologyMedicinePathologyIn vivoComputer scienceBiologyComputer visionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The biological characterization of an individual patient's tumor by noninvasive imaging will have an important role in cancer care and clinical research if the molecular processes that underlie the image data are known. Spatial heterogeneity in the dynamics of magnetic resonance imaging contrast enhancement (DCE-MRI) is hypothesized to reflect variations in tumor angiogenesis. Here we demonstrate the feasibility of precisely colocalizing DCE-MRI data with the genomic and proteomic profiles of underlying biopsy tissue using a novel MRI-guided biopsy technique in a patients with prostate cancer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular ImagingSame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207