Preoperative quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging predict aggressive disease in endometrial cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) may yield preoperative tumor biomarkers relevant for prognosis and therapy in cancer. Purpose To explore the value of preoperative DCE-MRI and DWI for the prediction of aggressive disease in endometrial cancer patients. Material and Methods Preoperative MRI (1.5-T) from 177 patients were analyzed and imaging parameters reflecting tumor microvasculature (from DCE-MRI) and tumor microstructure (from DWI) were estimated. The derived imaging parameters were explored in relation to clinico-pathological stage, histological subtype and grade, molecular markers, and patient outcome. Results Low tumor blood flow (F b ) and low rate constant for contrast agent intravasation (k ep ) were associated with high-risk histological subtype ( P ≤ 0.04 for both) and tended to be associated with poor prognosis ( P ≤ 0.09). Low tumor apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value and large tumor volume were both significantly associated with deep myometrial invasion ( P < 0.001 for both) and were also unfavorable prognostic factors ( P = 0.05 and P < 0.001, respectively). Conclusion DCE-MRI and DWI represent valuable supplements to conventional MRI by providing preoperative imaging biomarkers that predict aggressive disease in endometrial cancer patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".