MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Machine Learning-Based A Priori Chemotherapy Response Prediction in Breast Cancer Patients using Textural CT Biomarkers

2020· article· en· W3082115943 on OpenAlexaff
Hadi Moghadas-Dastjerdi, Hira Rahman Sha-E-Tallat, Lakshmanan Sannachi, Laurentius O. Osapoeta, Ali Sadeghi‐Naini, Gregory J. Czarnota

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerA priori and a posterioriOncologyComputer scienceChemotherapyMachine learningMedicineArtificial intelligenceCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early prediction of cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) could permit personalized treatment adjustments for patients, which would improve treatment outcomes and patient survival. For the first time, the efficiency of quantitative computed tomography (qCT) textural and second derivative of textural (SDT) features were investigated and compared in this study. It was demonstrated that intra-tumour heterogeneity can be probed through these biomarkers and used as chemotherapy tumour response predictors in breast cancer patients prior to the start of treatment. These features were used to develop a machine learning approach which provided promising results with cross-validated AUC0.632+, accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of 0.86, 81%, 74% and 88%, respectively.Clinical Relevance- The results obtained in this study demonstrate the potential of textural CT biomarkers as response predictors of standard NAC before treatment initiation.

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)0.003
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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