MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Survival prediction using radiomic signatures in metastatic gastric and esophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA).

2022· article· en· W4206581770 on OpenAlexaff
Michael J. Allen, Andrew Sertic, Zhihui Liu, Zijin Liu, Chihiro Suzuki, Elan David Panov, Lucy Xiaolu, Yvonne Bach, Raymond Woo-Jun Jang, Eric Xueyu Chen, Gail Darling, Jonathan Yeung, Carol J. Swallow, Savtaj S. Brar, Sangeetha Kalimuthu, Rebecca Wong, Patrick Veit‐Haibach, Elena Elimova

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai HospitalToronto General HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineCohortProportional hazards modelConcordanceOncologyRetrospective cohort studyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

357 Background: Radiomic characterisation of tumour phenotypes can generate image-driven biomarkers that potentially aid in clinical decision-making. We sought to identify radiomic features in metastatic GEA that may be predictive for survival outcomes. Methods: A retrospective analysis between 2009-20 identified patients (pts) with metastatic GEA. All pts received chemotherapy (CTx), with a ‘baseline’ and 8-12 week ‘on-treatment’ contrast-enhanced CT chest/abdomen/pelvis performed. Radiomic analysis was performed with LIFEx (livexsoft.org). Population demographics and clinical outcomes were recorded. Univariable Cox proportional hazards model (UVA) assessed clinical variables (n=26) predictive of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with p=0.05 indicating significance. Multivariable Cox model (MVA) was used to assess radiomic features (n=78) in the presence of clinical variables. Concordance index (C-index) was calculated to assess model performance (≥0.7 = high predictive accuracy). A ‘validation’ cohort analysis was performed to validate the model. Results: 166 pts were identified (primary cohort n=143; validation cohort n=23). 123 had de-novo metastatic disease, 43 recurrence following curative-intent therapy. In the primary cohort the median age was 58.1y, 101 (71%) were male, 120 (84%) were non-Asian and 131 (92%) were ECOG 0-1. Similar demographics were observed in the validation cohort. Both ‘baseline’ and ‘on-treatment’ scans UVA identified Her2 status, ethnicity, and the number of CTx cycles as predictive of PFS, while ECOG, brain metastases, neutrophil count (ANC), albumin and number of CTx cycles were predictive of OS. ‘Baseline’ model analysis for PFS and OS identified consistent radiomic features (HUskewness; HUpeakSphere), with an observed C-index 0.6 and 0.657 respectively. No radiomic features were identified on ‘on-treatment’ PFS analysis. ‘On-treatment’ OS analysis is shown in the table with 3 radiomic features (SHAPE Surface; SHAPE Compacity; PARAMS ZSpatial-Resampling) predictive for OS. The C-index is 0.76. Analysis of the validation cohort supported the model (C-index 0.815) for ‘on-treatment’ OS. Conclusions: Radiomic analysis identified a number of features associated with PFS and OS. The features specifically identified on ‘on-treatment’ scans were highly predictive for OS. Our analysis suggests radiomic features in addition to clinical variables can be predictive of outcome in patients with metastatic GEA receiving CTx.[Table: see text]

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalmedium
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.351 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207