MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012388037 · doi:10.3390/app10061988

Radiomics and Machine Learning in Anal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A New Step for Personalized Medicine?

2020· article· en· W3012388037 on OpenAlexaff
Nicolas Giraud, Paul Sargos, Nicolas Leduc, Olivier Saut, T. Vuong, V. Vendrely

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal and Anal Carcinomas
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiomicsMagnetic resonance imagingPositron emission tomographyRadiologyMedical physicsOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC) is an uncommon yet rising cancer worldwide. Definitive chemo-radiation (CRT) remains the best curative treatment option for non-metastatic cases in terms of local control, recurrence-free and progression-free survival. Still, despite overall good results, with 80% five-year survival, a subgroup of ASCC patients displays a high level of locoregional and/or metastatic recurrence rates, up to 35%, and may benefit from a more aggressive strategy. Beyond initial staging, there is no reliable marker to predict recurrence following CRT. Imaging, mostly positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), bears an important role in the diagnosis and follow-up of ASCC. The routine use of radiomics may enhance the quality of information derived from these modalities. It is thought that including data derived from radiomics into the input flow of machine learning algorithms may improve the prediction of recurrence. Although some studies have shown glimmers of hope, more data is needed before offering practitioners tools to identify high-risk patients and enable extensive clinical application, especially regarding the matters of imaging normalization, radiomics process standardization and access to larger patient databases with external validation in order to allow results extrapolation. The aim of this review is to present a critical overview from this data.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.217 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicColorectal and Anal CarcinomasFrench-language works237,207