Early Changes in Quantitative Ultrasound Imaging Parameters during Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy to Predict Recurrence in Patients with Locally Advanced Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: This study was conducted to explore the use of quantitative ultrasound (QUS) in predicting recurrence for patients with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) early during neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Methods: Eighty-three patients with LABC were scanned with 7 MHz ultrasound before starting NAC (week 0) and during treatment (week 4). Spectral parametric maps were generated corresponding to tumor volume. Twenty-four textural features (QUS-Tex1) were determined from parametric maps acquired using grey-level co-occurrence matrices (GLCM) for each patient, which were further processed to generate 64 texture derivatives (QUS-Tex1-Tex2), leading to a total of 95 features from each time point. Analysis was carried out on week 4 data and compared to baseline (week 0) data. ∆Week 4 data was obtained from the difference in QUS parameters, texture features (QUS-Tex1), and texture derivatives (QUS-Tex1-Tex2) of week 4 data and week 0 data. Patients were divided into two groups: recurrence and non-recurrence. Machine learning algorithms using k-nearest neighbor (k-NN) and support vector machines (SVMs) were used to generate radiomic models. Internal validation was undertaken using leave-one patient out cross-validation method. Results: With a median follow up of 69 months (range 7–118 months), 28 patients had disease recurrence. The k-NN classifier was the best performing algorithm at week 4 with sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under curve (AUC) of 87%, 75%, 81%, and 0.83, respectively. The inclusion of texture derivatives (QUS-Tex1-Tex2) in week 4 QUS data analysis led to the improvement of the classifier performances. The AUC increased from 0.70 (0.59 to 0.79, 95% confidence interval) without texture derivatives to 0.83 (0.73 to 0.92) with texture derivatives. The most relevant features separating the two groups were higher-order texture derivatives obtained from scatterer diameter and acoustic concentration-related parametric images. Conclusions: This is the first study highlighting the utility of QUS radiomics in the prediction of recurrence during the treatment of LABC. It reflects that the ongoing treatment-related changes can predict clinical outcomes with higher accuracy as compared to pretreatment features alone.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".