MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3024926608 · doi:10.1101/2020.05.14.20101014

Automated Prediction of Ischemic Brain Tissue Fate from Multi-Phase CT-Angiography in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke Using Machine Learning

2020· preprint· en· W3024926608 on OpenAlexaff
Wu Qiu, Hulin Kuang, Johanna M. Ospel, Michael D. Hill, Andrew M. Demchuk, Mayank Goyal, Bijoy K. Menon

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPenumbraMedicineConcordance correlation coefficientPerfusion scanningPerfusionAngiographyStroke (engine)Nuclear medicineConcordanceRadiologyCardiologyInternal medicineIschemiaMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Multiphase CT-Angiography (mCTA) provides time variant images of the pial vasculature supplying brain in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). To develop a machine learning (ML) technique to predict infarct, penumbra and tissue perfusion from mCTA source images. Methods: 284 patients with AIS were included from the PRoveIT study. All patients had non-contrast CT, mCTA and CTP imaging at baseline and follow up MRI/NCCT imaging. Of the 284 patient images, 140 patient images were randomly selected to train and validate three ML models to predict infarct, penumbra, and perfusion parameter on CTP, respectively. The remaining unseen 144 patient images independent of the derivation cohort were used to test the derived ML models. The predicted infarct, penumbra, and perfusion volume from ML models was spatially and volumetrically compared to manually contoured follow up infarct and time-dependent Tmax thresholded volume (CTP volume), using Bland-Altman plots, concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Results: Within the test cohort, Bland-Altman plots showed that the mean difference between the mCTA predicted infarct and follow up infarct was 21.7 mL (limit of agreement (LoA): -41.0 to 84.3mL) in the 100 patients who had acute reperfusion (mTICI 2b/2c/3), and 3.4mL (LoA: -66 to 72.9mL) in the 44 patients who did not achieve reperfusion (mTICI 0/1). Amongst reperfused subjects, CCC was 0.4 [95%CI: 0.15-0.55, P<.01] and ICC 0.42 [95% CI: 0.18-0.50, P<.01]; in non-reperfused subjects CCC was 0.52 [95%CI: 0.2-0.6, P<.001] and ICC 0.6 [95% CI: 0.37-0.76, P<.001]. No difference was observed between the mCTA and CTP predicted infarct volume for the overall test cohort (P=.67). Conclusion: Multiphase CT Angiography is able to predict infarct, penumbra and tissue perfusion, comparable to CT perfusion imaging.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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 venuemedRxiv→Same topicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management→French-language works237,207→