MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3180186455 · doi:10.1002/jmri.27803

Utility of Quantitative <scp>T2</scp>‐Mapping Compared to Conventional and Advanced Diffusion Weighted Imaging Techniques for Multiparametric Prostate <scp>MRI</scp> in Men with Hip Prosthesis

2021· article· en· W3180186455 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Sathiadoss, Nicola Schieda, Mohammad Haroon, Heba Osman, Sumaya Alrasheed, Trevor A. Flood, Gerd Melkus

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiffusion MRIMagnetic resonance imagingProstate cancerEffective diffusion coefficientNuclear medicineRadiologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) is fundamental for prostate cancer (PCa) detection with MRI; however, limited by susceptibility artifact from hip prosthesis. PURPOSE: To evaluate image quality and ability to detect PCa with quantitative T2-mapping and DWI in men with hip prosthesis undergoing prostate MRI. STUDY TYPE: Prospective, cross-sectional study. POPULATION: Thirty consecutive men with hip replacement (18 unilateral, 12 bilateral) undergoing prostate MRI from 2019 to 2021. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3-T; multiparametric MRI (T2W, DCE-MRI, echo-planar [EPI]-DWI), T2-mapping (Carr-Purcell-Meiboom-Gill), FOCUS-EPI-DWI, PROPELLER-DWI. ASSESSMENT: Five blinded radiologists independently evaluated MRI image quality using a 5-point Likert scale. PI-RADS v2.1 scores were applied in four interpretation strategies: 1) T2W-FSE+DCE-MRI+EPI-DWI, 2) T2W-FSE+DCE-MRI+EPI-DWI+FOCUS-EPI-DWI, 3) T2W-FSE+DCE-MRI+EPI-DWI+PROPELLER-DWI, 4) T2W-FSE+DCE-MRI+EPI-DWI+T2-maps. Five-point confidence scores were recorded. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis with pair-wise comparisons by Wilcoxon sign-rank, and paired t-tests, P < 0.05 was considered significant. Cohen's Kappa (k) for PI-RADSv2.1 scoring and proportion of correctly classified lesions tabulated for pathology-confirmed cases with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: For all radiologists, T2-map image quality was significantly higher than EPI-DWI, FOCUS-EPI-DWI, and PROPELLER-DWI and similar (P = 0.146-0.706) or significantly better (for two readers) than T2W-FSE and DCE-MRI. PI-RADS v2.1 agreement improved comparing strategy A (k = 0.46) to strategy B (k = 0.58) to strategy C (k = 0.58) and was highest with strategy D which included T2-maps (k = 1.00). Radiologists' confidence was significantly highest with strategy D. Strategies B and C had similar confidence (P = 0.051-0.063) both significantly outperforming strategy A. Twelve men with 17 lesions had pathology confirmed diagnoses (13 PCa, 4 benign). Strategy D had the highest proportion of correctly classified lesions (76.5-82.4%) with overlapping 95% confidence intervals. DATA CONCLUSION: T2-mapping may be a valuable adjunct to prostate MRI in men with hip replacement resulting in improved image quality, higher reader confidence, interobserver agreement, and accuracy in PI-RADS scoring. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 2.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.287
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 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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Magnetic Resonance ImagingSame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207