MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3149377276 · doi:10.2196/26601

Hyperpolarized Magnetic Resonance and Artificial Intelligence: Frontiers of Imaging in Pancreatic Cancer

2021· review· en· W3149377276 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
José S. Enriquez, Yan Chu, Shivanand Pudakalakatti, Kang‐Lin Hsieh, Duncan Salmon, Prasanta Dutta, Niki M. Zacharias, Eugene Lurie, Steven W. Millward, Florencia McAllister, Anirban Maitra, Subrata Sen, Ann M. Killary, Jian Zhang, Xiaoqian Jiang, Pratip K. Bhattacharya, Shayan Shams

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced NMR Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesPancreatic Cancer Action NetworkCancer Prevention and Research Institute of TexasUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at HoustonNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMagnetic resonance imagingPancreatic cancerMedical imagingMedicineComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceCancerRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is an unmet need for noninvasive imaging markers that can help identify the aggressive subtype(s) of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) at diagnosis and at an earlier time point, and evaluate the efficacy of therapy prior to tumor reduction. In the past few years, there have been two major developments with potential for a significant impact in establishing imaging biomarkers for PDAC and pancreatic cancer premalignancy: (1) hyperpolarized metabolic (HP)-magnetic resonance (MR), which increases the sensitivity of conventional MR by over 10,000-fold, enabling real-time metabolic measurements; and (2) applications of artificial intelligence (AI). OBJECTIVE: Our objective of this review was to discuss these two exciting but independent developments (HP-MR and AI) in the realm of PDAC imaging and detection from the available literature to date. METHODS: A systematic review following the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines was performed. Studies addressing the utilization of HP-MR and/or AI for early detection, assessment of aggressiveness, and interrogating the early efficacy of therapy in patients with PDAC cited in recent clinical guidelines were extracted from the PubMed and Google Scholar databases. The studies were reviewed following predefined exclusion and inclusion criteria, and grouped based on the utilization of HP-MR and/or AI in PDAC diagnosis. RESULTS: Part of the goal of this review was to highlight the knowledge gap of early detection in pancreatic cancer by any imaging modality, and to emphasize how AI and HP-MR can address this critical gap. We reviewed every paper published on HP-MR applications in PDAC, including six preclinical studies and one clinical trial. We also reviewed several HP-MR-related articles describing new probes with many functional applications in PDAC. On the AI side, we reviewed all existing papers that met our inclusion criteria on AI applications for evaluating computed tomography (CT) and MR images in PDAC. With the emergence of AI and its unique capability to learn across multimodal data, along with sensitive metabolic imaging using HP-MR, this knowledge gap in PDAC can be adequately addressed. CT is an accessible and widespread imaging modality worldwide as it is affordable; because of this reason alone, most of the data discussed are based on CT imaging datasets. Although there were relatively few MR-related papers included in this review, we believe that with rapid adoption of MR imaging and HP-MR, more clinical data on pancreatic cancer imaging will be available in the near future. CONCLUSIONS: Integration of AI, HP-MR, and multimodal imaging information in pancreatic cancer may lead to the development of real-time biomarkers of early detection, assessing aggressiveness, and interrogating early efficacy of therapy in PDAC.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.927

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicAdvanced NMR Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207