MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040329659 · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-67823-8

A priori prediction of tumour response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients using quantitative CT and machine learning

2020· article· en· W3040329659 on OpenAlexafffund
Hadi Moghadas-Dastjerdi, Hira Rahman Sha-E-Tallat, Lakshmanan Sannachi, Ali Sadeghi‐Naini, Gregory J. Czarnota

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreYork UniversityUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchTerry Fox Foundation
KeywordsBreast cancerNeoadjuvant therapyChemotherapyOncologyComputer scienceA priori and a posterioriMedicineCancerInternal medicineMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Response to Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has demonstrated a high correlation to survival in locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) patients. An early prediction of responsiveness to NAC could facilitate treatment adjustments on an individual patient basis that would be expected to improve treatment outcomes and patient survival. This study investigated, for the first time, the efficacy of quantitative computed tomography (qCT) parametric imaging to characterize intra-tumour heterogeneity and its application in predicting tumour response to NAC in LABC patients. Textural analyses were performed on CT images acquired from 72 patients before the start of chemotherapy to determine quantitative features of intra-tumour heterogeneity. The best feature subset for response prediction was selected through a sequential feature selection with bootstrap 0.632 + area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve ([Formula: see text]) as a performance criterion. Several classifiers were evaluated for response prediction using the selected feature subset. Amongst the applied classifiers an Adaboost decision tree provided the best results with cross-validated [Formula: see text], accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of 0.89, 84%, 80% and 88%, respectively. The promising results obtained in this study demonstrate the potential of the proposed biomarkers to be used as predictors of LABC tumour response to NAC prior to the start of treatment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.313
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations31
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207