MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203473550 · doi:10.1007/s11060-021-03844-1

18F-FET-PET-guided gross total resection improves overall survival in patients with WHO grade III/IV glioma: moving towards a multimodal imaging-guided resection

2021· article· en· W3203473550 on OpenAlexaff
Jonas Ort, Hussam Aldin Hamou, Julius M. Kernbach, Karlijn Hakvoort, Christian Blume, Philipp Lohmann, Norbert Galldiks, Dieter Henrik Heiland, Felix M. Mottaghy, Hans Clusmann, Georg Neuloh, Karl‐Josef Langen, Daniel Delev

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuro-Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNuclear medicineGliomaPet imagingPET-CTRadiosurgeryPositron emission tomographyRadiologyRadiation therapyCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose PET using radiolabeled amino acid [ 18 F]-fluoro-ethyl- L -tyrosine (FET-PET) is a well-established imaging modality for glioma diagnostics. The biological tumor volume (BTV) as depicted by FET-PET often differs in volume and location from tumor volume of contrast enhancement (CE) in MRI. Our aim was to investigate whether a gross total resection of BTVs defined as < 1 cm 3 of residual BTV (PET GTR) correlates with better oncological outcome. Methods We retrospectively analyzed imaging and survival data from patients with primary and recurrent WHO grade III or IV gliomas who underwent FET-PET before surgical resection. Tumor overlap between FET-PET and CE was evaluated. Completeness of FET-PET resection (PET GTR) was calculated after superimposition and semi-automated segmentation of pre-operative FET-PET and postoperative MRI imaging. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan–Meier method and the log-rank test. Results From 30 included patients, PET GTR was achieved in 20 patients. Patients with PET GTR showed improved median OS with 19.3 compared to 13.7 months for patients with residual FET uptake (p = 0.007; HR 0.3; 95% CI 0.12–0.76). This finding remained as independent prognostic factor after performing multivariate analysis (HR 0.19, 95% CI 0.06–0.62, p = 0.006). Other survival influencing factors such as age, IDH-mutation, MGMT promotor status, and adjuvant treatment modalities were equally distributed between both groups. Conclusion Our results suggest that PET GTR improves the OS in patients with WHO grade III or IV gliomas. A multimodal imaging approach including FET-PET for surgical planning in newly diagnosed and recurrent tumors may improve the oncological outcome in glioma patients.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.286 · 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.

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

Citations28
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuro-OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207