An Automated Segmentation Pipeline for Intratumoural Regions in Animal Xenografts Using Machine Learning and Saturation Transfer MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Saturation transfer MRI can be useful in the characterization of different tumour types. It is sensitive to tumour metabolism, microstructure, and microenvironment. This study aimed to use saturation transfer to differentiate between intratumoural regions, demarcate tumour boundaries, and reduce data acquisition times by identifying the imaging scheme with the most impact on segmentation accuracy. Saturation transfer-weighted images were acquired over a wide range of saturation amplitudes and frequency offsets along with T1 and T2 maps for 34 tumour xenografts in mice. Independent component analysis and Gaussian mixture modelling were used to segment the images and identify intratumoural regions. Comparison between the segmented regions and histopathology indicated five distinct clusters: three corresponding to intratumoural regions (active tumour, necrosis/apoptosis, and blood/edema) and two extratumoural (muscle and a mix of muscle and connective tissue). The fraction of tumour voxels segmented as necrosis/apoptosis quantitatively matched those calculated from TUNEL histopathological assays. An optimal protocol was identified providing reasonable qualitative agreement between MRI and histopathology and consisting of T1 and T2 maps and 22 magnetization transfer (MT)-weighted images. A three-image subset was identified that resulted in a greater than 90% match in positive and negative predictive value of tumour voxels compared to those found using the entire 24-image dataset. The proposed algorithm can potentially be used to develop a robust intratumoural segmentation method.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".