Predicting recurrence risks in lung cancer patients using multimodal radiomics and random survival forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PurposeWe developed a model integrating multimodal quantitative imaging features from tumor and nontumor regions, qualitative features, and clinical data to improve the risk stratification of patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).ApproachWe retrospectively analyzed 135 patients [mean age, 69 years (43 to 87, range); 100 male patients and 35 female patients] with NSCLC who underwent upfront surgical resection between 2008 and 2012. The tumor and peritumoral regions on both preoperative CT and FDG PET-CT and the vertebral bodies L3 to L5 on FDG PET were segmented to assess the tumor and bone marrow uptake, respectively. Radiomic features were extracted and combined with clinical and CT qualitative features. A random survival forest model was developed using the top-performing features to predict the time to recurrence/progression in the training cohort (n = 101), validated in the testing cohort (n = 34) using the concordance, and compared with a stage-only model. Patients were stratified into high- and low-risks of recurrence/progression using Kaplan–Meier analysis.ResultsThe model, consisting of stage, three wavelet texture features, and three wavelet first-order features, achieved a concordance of 0.78 and 0.76 in the training and testing cohorts, respectively, significantly outperforming the baseline stage-only model results of 0.67 (p < 0.005) and 0.60 (p = 0.008), respectively. Patients at high- and low-risks of recurrence/progression were significantly stratified in both the training (p < 0.005) and the testing (p = 0.03) cohorts.ConclusionsOur radiomic model, consisting of stage and tumor, peritumoral, and bone marrow features from CT and FDG PET-CT significantly stratified patients into low- and high-risk of recurrence/progression.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".