Prospective Evaluation of an R2* Method for Assessing Liver Iron Concentration (LIC) Against FerriScan: Derivation of the Calibration Curve and Characterization of the Nature and Source of Uncertainty in the Relationship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: FerriScan is the method-of-choice for noninvasive liver iron concentration (LIC) quantification. However, it has a number of drawbacks including cost and expediency. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: To characterize an R2*-based MRI technique that may potentially be used as an alternative to FerriScan. This was accomplished through the derivation of a calibration curve that characterized the relationship between FerriScan-derived LIC and R2*. The nature and source of uncertainty in this curve were investigated. It was hypothesized that the source of uncertainty is heterogeneity of LIC across the liver. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. SUBJECTS: In all, 125 patients (69 women, 56 men) undergoing chelation treatment for iron overload prospectively underwent FerriScan and R2* MRI during the same exam. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: Pulse sequences included 2D multislice spin-echo pulse for FerriScan, and a prototype 3D 6-echo gradient echo acquisition for R2* mapping at 1.5T. ASSESSMENT: A linear calibration curve was derived from the relationship between FerriScan-derived LIC estimates and R2* through least-squares fitting. STATISTICAL TESTS: The nature of the uncertainty in the curve was characterized through tests of normality and homoscedasticity. The source of uncertainty was tested by comparing the magnitude of LIC variation over the FerriScan ROI to the observed uncertainty in the R2*-derived LIC estimates. RESULTS: A linear relationship between logarithmically transformed FerriScan-derived LIC and R2* (log{FerriScan-derived LIC} = 1.029 log{R2*} - 3.822) was confirmed. Uncertainty was random, with a behaviour that was normal and homoscedastic. The source of uncertainty was confirmed as iron heterogeneity across the liver. The nontransformed calibration curve was: FerriScan-derived LIC = 0.0266⋅R2*, with a constant coefficient-of-variation of 0.32. DATA CONCLUSION: FerriScan and R2* techniques were found to provide equivalent quantification of LIC in this study. Any difference in accuracy or precision was at a level lower than the uncertainty caused by variation in LIC over the liver. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:1467-1474.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".