MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2529768151 · doi:10.7759/cureus.817

Interhemispheric Difference Images from Postoperative Diffusion Tensor Imaging of Gliomas

2016· article· en· W2529768151 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert Kosztyla, Stefan A. Reinsberg, Vitali Moiseenko, Brian Toyota, Alan Nichol

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
FundersOrganisation Canadienne des Physiciens MédicauxCanadian Association of Radiation OncologyAmerican Association of Physicists in Medicine
KeywordsMedicineDiffusion MRINuclear medicineFractional anisotropyMagnetic resonance imagingVoxelGliomaNuclear magnetic resonanceRadiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Determining the full extent of gliomas during radiotherapy planning can be challenging with conventional T1 and T2 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The purpose of this study was to develop a method to automatically calculate differences in the fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD) values in target volumes obtained with diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) by comparing with values from anatomically homologous voxels on the contralateral side of the brain. Methods Seven patients with a histologically confirmed glioma underwent postoperative radiotherapy planning with 1.5 T MRI and computed tomography. DTI was acquired using echo planar imaging for 20 noncolinear directions with b = 1000 s/mm2 and one additional image with b = 0, repeated four times for signal averaging. The distribution of FA and MD was calculated in the gross tumor volume (GTV), shells 0-5 mm, 5-10 mm, 10-15 mm, 15-20 mm, and 20-25 mm outside the GTV, and the GTV mirrored in the left-right direction (mirGTV). All images were aligned to a template image, and FA and MD interhemispheric difference images were calculated. The difference in mean FA and MD between the regions of interest was statistically tested using two-sided paired t-tests with α = 0.05. Results The mean FA in mirGTV was 0.20 ± 0.04, which was larger than the FA in the GTV (0.12 ± 0.03) and shells 0-5 mm (0.15 ± 0.03) and 5-10 mm (0.17 ± 0.03) outside the GTV. The mean MD (×10-3 mm2/s) in mirGTV was 0.93 ± 0.09, which was smaller than the MD in the GTV (1.48 ± 0.19) and the peritumoral shells. The distribution of FA and MD interhemispheric differences followed the same trends as FA and MD values. Conclusions This study successfully implemented a method for calculation of FA and MD differences by comparison of voxel values with anatomically homologous voxels on the contralateral side of the brain. Further research is warranted to determine if radiotherapy planning using these images can be used to improve target delineation.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207