PI-RADS guided discovery radiomics for characterization of prostate lesions with diffusion-weighted MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To demonstrate the added predictive value of radiomic features to prostate radiology scoring scheme (PIRADS), a systematic approach is required to determine whether there is indeed latent predictive information of prostate cancer in diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance images (DW-MRI) that cannot be captured by radiologists’ visual interpretations alone. In this work, we propose a PI-RADS guided discovery radiomics solution where a predictive model for prostate cancer is built by discovering radiomic features that capture information on the phenotype of lesions, which is not visible to radiologists when using PI-RADS scoring system. We investigated patients with PI-RADS scores indicating presence or absence of significant prostate cancer separately and ran experiments on patients with DW-MRI followed by targeted biopsy, using first and second order quantitative imaging features. Our experiments on DW-MRI and pathology data of 50 patients show that the proposed approach improves the overall accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis significantly compared to PI-RADS scores alone.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".