Radiomics as an emerging tool in the management of brain metastases
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain metastases (BM) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality in patients with advanced cancer. Despite significant advances in surgical, radiation, and systemic therapy in recent years, the median overall survival of patients with BM is less than 1 year. The acquisition of medical images, such as computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), is critical for the diagnosis and stratification of patients to appropriate treatments. Radiomic analyses have the potential to improve the standard of care for patients with BM by applying artificial intelligence (AI) with already acquired medical images to predict clinical outcomes and direct the personalized care of BM patients. Herein, we outline the existing literature applying radiomics for the clinical management of BM. This includes predicting patient response to radiotherapy and identifying radiation necrosis, performing virtual biopsies to predict tumor mutation status, and determining the cancer of origin in brain tumors identified via imaging. With further development, radiomics has the potential to aid in BM patient stratification while circumventing the need for invasive tissue sampling, particularly for patients not eligible for surgical resection.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it