A prognostic model integrating PET‐derived metrics and image texture analyses with clinical risk factors from GOYA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Image texture analysis (radiomics) uses radiographic images to quantify characteristics that may identify tumour heterogeneity and associated patient outcomes. Using fluoro-deoxy-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT)-derived data, including quantitative metrics, image texture analysis and other clinical risk factors, we aimed to develop a prognostic model that predicts survival in patients with previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) from GOYA (NCT01287741). Image texture features and clinical risk factors were combined into a random forest model and compared with the international prognostic index (IPI) for DLBCL based on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) predictions. Baseline FDG-PET scans were available for 1263 patients, 832 patients of these were cell-of-origin (COO)-evaluable. Patients were stratified by IPI or radiomics features plus clinical risk factors into low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups. The random forest model with COO subgroups identified a clearer high-risk population (45% 2-year PFS [95% confidence interval (CI) 40%-52%]; 65% 2-year OS [95% CI 59%-71%]) than the IPI (58% 2-year PFS [95% CI 50%-67%]; 69% 2-year OS [95% CI 62%-77%]). This study confirms that standard clinical risk factors can be combined with PET-derived image texture features to provide an improved prognostic model predicting survival in untreated DLBCL.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".