MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224212345 · doi:10.1002/mp.15651

Assessment of tissue toxicity risk in breast radiotherapy using Bayesian networks

2022· article· en· W4224212345 on OpenAlexafffund
Philip Ciunkiewicz, Michael Roumeliotis, Kailyn Stenhouse, Philip McGeachy, Sarah Quirk, Petra Grendarova, Svetlana Yanushkevich

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFeature (linguistics)ToxicityMedicineRadiation therapyBayesian networkComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceNuclear medicineRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of this analysis is to predict worsening post-treatment normal tissue toxicity in patients undergoing accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) therapy and to quantitatively identify which diagnostic, anatomical, and dosimetric features are contributing to these outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective study of APBI treatments was performed using 32 features pertaining to various stages of the patient's treatment journey. These features were used to inform and construct a Bayesian network (BN) based on both statistical analysis of feature distributions and relative clinical importance. The target feature for prediction was defined as a measurable worsening of telangiectasia, subcutaneous tissue induration, or fibrosis when compared against the observed baseline. Parameter learning for the network was performed using data from the 299 patients included in the ACCEL trial and predictive performance was measured. Feature importance for the BN was quantified using a novel information-theoretic approach. RESULTS: 0.021 using five-fold cross-validation with separate test data across 100 trials. The volume of the clinical target volume, gross target volume, and baseline toxicity measurements were found to have the highest feature importance and mutual dependence with normal tissue toxicity in the network, representing the strongest contribution to patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The BN outperformed conventional ML techniques in predicting tissue toxicity outcomes and provided deeper insight into which features are contributing to these outcomes.

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207