Predicting Local Failure after Stereotactic Radiation Therapy in Brain Metastasis using Quantitative CT and Machine Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite recent advances in cancer treatment, the prognosis of patients diagnosed with brain metastasis is still poor. The median survival is limited to months even for patients undergoing treatment. Radiation therapy is a main component of treatment for brain metastasis. However, radiotherapy cannot control local progression in up to 20% of the metastatic brain tumours. An early prediction of radiotherapy outcome for individual patients could facilitate therapy adjustments to improve its efficacy. This study investigated the potential of quantitative CT biomarkers in conjunction with machine learning methods to predict local failure after radiotherapy in brain metastasis. Volumetric CT images were acquired for radiation treatment planning from 120 patients undergoing stereotactic radiotherapy. Quantitative features characterizing the morphology and texture were extracted from different regions of each lesion. A feature reduction/selection framework was adapted to define a quantitative CT biomarker of radiotherapy outcome. Different machine learning methods were applied and evaluated to predict the local failure outcome at pre-treatment. The optimum biomarker consisting of two features in conjunction with an AdaBoost with decision tree could predict the local failure outcome with 71% accuracy on an independent test set (20 patients, 31 lesions). This study is a step forward towards prediction of radiotherapy outcome in brain metastasis using quantitative imaging and machine learning.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".