MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2978649654 · doi:10.1148/radiol.2019190545

Diffusion-weighted MRI in Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Apparent Diffusion Coefficient as a Response Marker

2019· article· en· W2978649654 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jessica Winfield, Jennifer C. Wakefield, David Dolling, Marcia Hall, Susan Freeman, James D. Brenton, Kerryn Lutchman-Singh, Erika Pace, Andrew N. Priest, Rebecca Quest, N. Jane Taylor, Hani Gabra, Liam McKnight, David J. Collins, Susana Banerjee, Emma Hall, Nandita M. deSouza

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research CentreAddenbrooke's Charitable Trust, Cambridge University HospitalsMedical Research CouncilCambridge University HospitalsEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchInstitute of Cancer ResearchUniversity of CambridgeCancer Research UK
KeywordsMedicineEffective diffusion coefficientCohortInterquartile rangeDebulkingProspective cohort studyConfidence intervalOvarian cancerInternal medicineResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsOncologyMagnetic resonance imagingSurgeryCancerRadiologyChemotherapyProgressive disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer results in a relapse rate of 75%. Early markers of response would enable optimization of management and improved outcome in both primary and recurrent disease. Purpose To assess the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), derived from diffusion-weighted MRI, as an indicator of response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival. Materials and Methods This prospective multicenter trial (from 2012–2016) recruited participants with stage III or IV ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer (newly diagnosed, cohort one; relapsed, cohort two) scheduled for platinum-based chemotherapy, with interval debulking surgery in cohort one. Cohort one underwent two baseline MRI examinations separated by 0–7 days to assess ADC repeatability; an additional MRI was performed after three treatment cycles. Cohort two underwent imaging at baseline and after one and three treatment cycles. ADC changes in responders and nonresponders were compared (Wilcoxon rank sum tests). PFS and overall survival were assessed by using a multivariable Cox model. Results A total of 125 participants (median age, 63.3 years [interquartile range, 57.0–70.7 years]; 125 women; cohort one, n = 47; cohort two, n = 78) were included. Baseline ADC (range, 77–258 × 10−5mm2s−1) was repeatable (upper and lower 95% limits of agreement of 12 × 10−5mm2s−1 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 6 × 10−5mm2s−1 to 18 × 10−5mm2s−1] and −15 × 10−5mm2s−1 [95% CI: −21 × 10−5mm2s−1 to −9 × 10−5mm2s−1]). ADC increased in 47% of cohort two after one treatment cycle, and in 58% and 53% of cohorts one and two, respectively, after three cycles. Percentage change from baseline differed between responders and nonresponders after three cycles (16.6% vs 3.9%; P = .02 [biochemical response definition]; 19.0% vs 6.2%; P = .04 [radiologic definition]). ADC increase after one cycle was associated with longer PFS in cohort two (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI: 0.75, 0.98; P = .03). ADC change was not indicative of overall survival for either cohort. Conclusion After three cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) changes are indicative of response. After one treatment cycle, increased ADC is indicative of improved progression-free survival in relapsed disease. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license. Online supplemental material is available for this article.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations37
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiologySame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207