Precision Digital Oncology: Emerging Role of Radiomics-based Biomarkers and Artificial Intelligence for Advanced Imaging and Characterization of Brain Tumors
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advances in computerized image analysis and the use of artificial intelligence–based approaches for image-based analysis and construction of prediction algorithms represent a new era for noninvasive biomarker discovery. In recent literature, it has become apparent that radiologic images can serve as mineable databases that contain large amounts of quantitative features with potential clinical significance. Extraction and analysis of these quantitative features is commonly referred to as texture or radiomic analysis. Numerous studies have demonstrated applications for texture and radiomic characterization methods for assessing brain tumors to improve noninvasive predictions of tumor histologic characteristics, molecular profile, distinction of treatment-related changes, and prediction of patient survival. In this review, the current use and future potential of texture or radiomic-based approaches with machine learning for brain tumor image analysis and prediction algorithm construction will be discussed. This technology has the potential to advance the value of diagnostic imaging by extracting currently unused information on medical scans that enables more precise, personalized therapy; however, significant barriers must be overcome if this technology is to be successfully implemented on a wide scale for routine use in the clinical setting. Keywords: Adults and Pediatrics, Brain/Brain Stem, CNS, Computer Aided Diagnosis (CAD), Computer Applications-General (Informatics), Image Postprocessing, Informatics, Neural Networks, Neuro-Oncology, Oncology, Treatment Effects, Tumor Response Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2020
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it