MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2536799809 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2016.396

PC3 - 219 Evaluation of delayed FDG-PET in differentiating progressive disease from post-treatment radiation effect in brain tumors

2016· article· en· W2536799809 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rebecca A. Harrison, Asif Masood, Osama Mawlawi, Dawid Schellingerhout, Beth Chasen, Richelle Millican, J. Li, B. O’Brien

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNuclear medicineMagnetic resonance imagingPositron emission tomographyLesionRadiographyRadiation therapyRadiologyProgressive diseaseNeuroimagingPathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional and advanced magnetic resonance imaging techniques are often unable to differentiate progressive central nervous system neoplasm from post-treatment radiation effect (PTRE). 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) with delayed imaging has been shown to increase the specificity of PET imaging for cerebral neoplasm in small studies. We sought to further evaluate the potential diagnostic benefits of delayed imaging at 5 hours versus standard imaging at 1 hour to differentiate progressive disease (PD) from PTRE in patients with primary or metastatic brain tumors treated with radiation therapy. Ten patients with primary (n=4) and metastatic (n=6) brain tumors were identified, with diagnostic confirmation of PD or PTRE provided by pathology or>3 month clinical and radiographic follow-up. Maximum standard uptake values (SUV) were calculated for suspicious areas of abnormal contrast enhancement (lesion) and compared to contralateral normal appearing brain (background) at both early and delayed time points. Seven patients were classified as having PD and 3 as having PTRE based pathology or clinical/radiographic follow up. The average lesion to background ratio (L/B) at the early time point (1.16+0.50) was significantly different than L/B for the later time point (1.72+1.10), p=0.030. The mean L/B for PD was 2.17+1.01 at the later time point compared to 0.65+0.06 for PTRE (p=0.010). For the earlier time point, L/B for PD was 1.40+0.42, compared to the L/B for PTRE which was 0.61+0.10 (p=0.003).L/B ratios at early and delayed time points successfully differentiated between patients with PD and PTRE, with significantly greater L/B ratios seen at delayed time points. These initial results are promising and further investigation is underway to evaluate the contribution of delayed imaging in differentiating PD from PTRE.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→