MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2468572872 · doi:10.1118/1.4957938

WE‐FG‐206‐08: Pulmonary Functional Imaging Biomarkers of NSCLC to Guide and Optimize Functional Lung Avoidance Radiotherapy

2016· article· en· W2468572872 on OpenAlexaff
Khadija Sheikh, Dante P. I. Capaldi, Douglas A. Hoover, David A. Palma, Brian Yaremko, Grace Párraga

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityRobarts Clinical Trials
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapyCOPDRandomized controlled trialStage (stratigraphy)LungVentilation (architecture)Lung cancerRadiologyMechanical ventilationQuality of life (healthcare)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Functional lung avoidance radiotherapy promises optimized therapy planning by minimizing dose to well‐functioning lung and maximizing dose to the rest of the lung. Patients with NSCLC commonly present with co‐morbid COPD and heterogeneously distributed ventilation abnormalities stemming from emphysema, airways disease, and tumour burden. We hypothesized that pulmonary functional imaging methods may be used to optimize radiotherapy plans to avoid regions of well‐functioning lung and significantly improve outcomes like quality‐of‐life and survival. To ascertain the utility of functional lung avoidance therapy in clinical practice, we measured COPD phenotypes in NSCLC patients enrolled in a randomized‐controlled‐clinical‐trial prior to curative intent therapy. Methods: Thirty stage IIIA/IIIB NSCLC patients provided written informed consent to a randomized‐controlled‐clinical‐trial ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02002052 ) comparing outcomes in patients randomized to standard or image‐guided radiotherapy. Hyperpolarized noble gas MRI ventilation‐defect‐percent (VDP) (Kirby et al, Acad Radiol, 2012) as well as CT‐emphysema measurements were determined. Patients were stratified based on quantitative imaging evidence of ventilation‐defects and emphysema into two subgroups: 1) tumour‐specific ventilation defects only (TSD), and, 2) tumour‐specific and other ventilation defects with and without emphysema (TSDVE). Receiver‐operating‐characteristic (ROC) curves were used to characterize the performance of clinical measures as predictors of the presence of non‐tumour specific ventilation defects. Results: Twenty‐one out of thirty subjects (70%) had non‐tumour specific ventilation defects (TSDVE) and nine subjects had ONLY tumour‐specific defects (TSD). Subjects in the TSDVE group had significantly greater smoking‐history (p=.006) and airflow obstruction (FEV1/FVC) (p=.001). ROC analysis demonstrated an 87% classification rate for smoking pack‐years, 90% for FEV1/FVC, and 56% for tumour RECIST measurements for identifying patients with non‐tumour and tumour‐specific ventilation abnormalities. Conclusion: 70% of NSCLC patients had ventilation abnormalities stemming from emphysema, airways disease and tumour burden. Smoking‐history and airflow obstruction, but not RECIST, identified NSCLC patients with ventilation abnormalities appropriate for functional lung avoidance therapy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→