VERDICT MRI validation in fresh and fixed prostate specimens using patient‐specific moulds for histological and MR alignment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The VERDICT framework for modelling diffusion MRI data aims to relate parameters from a biophysical model to histological features used for tumour grading in prostate cancer. Validation of the VERDICT model is necessary for clinical use. This study compared VERDICT parameters obtained ex vivo with histology in five specimens from radical prostatectomy. A patient-specific 3D-printed mould was used to investigate the effects of fixation on VERDICT parameters and to aid registration to histology. A rich diffusion data set was acquired in each ex vivo prostate before and after fixation. At both time points, data were best described by a two-compartment model: the model assumes that an anisotropic tensor compartment represents the extracellular space and a restricted sphere compartment models the intracellular space. The effect of fixation on model parameters associated with tissue microstructure was small. The patient-specific mould minimized tissue deformations and co-localized slices, so that rigid registration of MRI to histology images allowed region-based comparison with histology. The VERDICT estimate of the intracellular volume fraction corresponded to histological indicators of cellular fraction, including high values in tumour regions. The average sphere radius from VERDICT, representing the average cell size, was relatively uniform across samples. The primary diffusion direction from the extracellular compartment of the VERDICT model aligned with collagen fibre patterns in the stroma obtained by structure tensor analysis. This confirmed the biophysical relationship between ex vivo VERDICT parameters and tissue microstructure from histology.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".