Radiomics feature stability of open-source software evaluated on apparent diffusion coefficient maps in head and neck cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radiomics is a promising technique for discovering image based biomarkers of therapy response in cancer. Reproducibility of radiomics features is a known issue that is addressed by the image biomarker standardisation initiative (IBSI), but it remains challenging to interpret previously published radiomics signatures. This study investigates the reproducibility of radiomics features calculated with two widely used radiomics software packages (IBEX, MaZda) in comparison to an IBSI compliant software package (PyRadiomics). Intensity histogram, shape and textural features were extracted from 334 diffusion weighted magnetic resonance images of 59 head and neck cancer (HNC) patients from the PREDICT-HN observational radiotherapy study. Based on name and linear correlation, PyRadiomics shares 83 features with IBEX and 49 features with MaZda, a sub-set of well correlated features are considered reproducible (IBEX: 15 features, MaZda: 18 features). We explore the impact of including non-reproducible radiomics features in a HNC radiotherapy response model. It is possible to classify equivalent patient groups using radiomic features from either software, but only when restricting the model to reliable features using a correlation threshold method. This is relevant for clinical biomarker validation trials as it provides a framework to assess the reproducibility of reported radiomic signatures from existing trials.
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 | 0.009 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".