MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205632731 · doi:10.3390/jpm11101025

Classification and Visualization of Chemotherapy-Induced Cognitive Impairment in Volumetric Convolutional Neural Networks

2021· article· en· W3205632731 on OpenAlexaff
Kaiyi Lin, Vincent Chen, Yuan‐Hsiung Tsai, Roger S. McIntyre, Jun‐Cheng Weng

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Personalized Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersChiayi Chang Gung Memorial HospitalMinistry of Science and Technology, TaiwanChang Gung University
KeywordsBreast cancerCognitionMedicineRecallChemotherapyTemporal lobeCancerCognitive impairmentAudiologyDeep learningResting state fMRINeuroscienceOncologyInternal medicineRadiologyPsychologyArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceCognitive psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breast cancer is the most common female cancer worldwide, and breast cancer accounts for 30% of female cancers. Of all the treatment modalities, breast cancer survivors who have undergone chemotherapy might complain about cognitive impairment during and after cancer treatment. This phenomenon, chemo-brain, is used to describe the alterations in cognitive functions after receiving systemic chemotherapy. Few reports detect the chemotherapy-induced cognitive impairment (CICI) by performing functional MRI (fMRI) and a deep learning analysis. In this study, we recruited 55 postchemotherapy breast cancer survivors (C+ group) and 65 healthy controls (HC group) and extracted mean fractional amplitudes of low-frequency fluctuations (mfALFF) from resting-state fMRI as our input feature. Two state-of-the-art deep learning architectures, ResNet-50 and DenseNet-121, were transformed to 3D, embedded with squeeze and excitation (SE) blocks and then trained to differentiate cerebral alterations based on the effect of chemotherapy. An integrated gradient was applied to visualize the pattern that was recognized by our model. The average performance of SE-ResNet-50 models was an accuracy of 80%, precision of 78% and recall of 70%; on the other hand, the SE-DenseNet-121 model reached identical results with an average of 80% accuracy, 86% precision and 80% recall. The regions with the greatest contributions highlighted by the integrated gradients algorithm for differentiating chemo-brain were the frontal, temporal, parietal and occipital lobe. These regions were consistent with other studies and strongly associated with the default mode and dorsal attention networks. We constructed two volumetric state-of-the-art models and visualized the patterns that are critical for identifying chemo-brains from normal brains. We hope that these results will be helpful in clinically tracking chemo-brain in the future.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Personalized MedicineSame topicCancer-related cognitive impairment studiesFrench-language works237,207