A clinical‐radiomic model for improved prognostication of surgical candidates with colorectal liver metastases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Colorectal cancer with liver metastases is potentially curable with surgical resection however clinical prognostic factors can insufficiently stratify patients. This study aims to assess whether radiomic features are prognostic and can inform clinical decision making. METHODS: This single-site retrospective study included 102 patients who underwent colorectal liver metastases resection with preoperative computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with gadoxetic acid (EOB) and clinical covariates. A lasso-regularized multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was applied to 114 features (10 clinical, 104 radiomic) to determine association with disease-free survival (DFS). A prognostic index was derived using the significant Cox regression coefficients and their corresponding input features and a threshold was determined to classify patients into high- and low-risk groups, and DFS compared using log-rank tests. RESULTS: Four covariates were significantly associated with DFS; bilobar disease (hazard ratio [HR]= 1.56; P = .0043), complete pathological response (HR= 0.67; P = .025), minimum pixel value (HR= 1.66; P = .00016), and small area emphasis (HR= 0.62; P = .0013) from the EOB-MRI data. Radiomic CT features were not prognostic. The prognostic index strongly stratified high- and low-risk prognostic groups (HR = 0.31; P = .00068). CONCLUSION: Radiomic MRI features provided meaningful prognostic information above clinical covariates alone. This merits further validation for potential clinical implementation to inform management.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".