Pre‐treatment total metabolic tumour volumes in lymphoma: Does quantity matter?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) is used for the staging of lymphomas. Clinical information, such as Ann Arbor stage and number of involved sites, is derived from baseline staging and correlates with tumour volume. With modern imaging software, exact measures of total metabolic tumour volumes (tMTV) can be determined, in a semi- or fully-automated manner. Several technical factors, such as tumour segmentation and PET/CT technology influence tMTV and there is no consensus on a standardized uptake value (SUV) thresholding method, or how to include the volumes in the bone marrow and spleen. In diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, follicular lymphoma, peripheral T-cell lymphoma, and Hodgkin lymphoma, tMTV has been shown to predict progression-free survival and/or overall survival, after adjustments for clinical risk scores. However, most studies have used receiver operating curves to determine the optimal cut-off for tMTV and many studies did not include a training-validation approach, which led to the risk of overestimation of the independent prognostic value of tMTV. The identified cut-off values are heterogeneous, even when the same SUV thresholding method is used. Future studies should focus on testing tMTV in homogeneously-treated cohorts and seek to validate identified cut-off values externally so that a prognostic value can be documented, over and above currently used clinical surrogates for tumour volume.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".