Demystifying neuroblastoma malignancy through fractal dimension, entropy, and lacunarity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Neuroblastoma is a pediatric solid tumor with a prognosis associated with histology and age of the patient, which are the parameters of the well-established current classification (Shimada classification). Despite the development of new treatment options, the prognosis of high-risk neuroblastoma patients is still poor. Therefore, there is a continuous need to stratify the children suffering from this tumor. A mathematical and computational approach is proposed to enable automatic and precise cancer diagnosis on the histological slide. Methods: We targeted the complexity of neuroblastoma by calculating its image entropy ( S), fractal dimension (FD), and lacunarity (λ) in a combined mathematical code. First, we tested the proposed method for patient-derived glioma images. It allowed distinguishing between normal brain tissue, grade II, and grade III glioma, which harbor different outcomes. Results: In neuroblastoma, our analysis of image’s FD, S, and λ combined with a machine learning algorithm automatically predicted tumor malignancy with a receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.82. FD, S, and λ distinguish between neuroblastoma and ganglioneuroma, but they only partially differentiate between the normal samples and the other classes. Ganglioneuroma, the most differentiated form, and poorly-differentiated neuroblastoma display different values of FD, S, and λ. Conclusions: FD, S, and λ of imaging recognize groups in neuroblastic tumors. We suggest that future studies including these features may challenge the current Shimada classification of neuroblastoma with categories of favorable and unfavorable histology. It is expected that this methodology could trigger multicenter studies and potentially find practical use in the clinical setting of children’s hospitals worldwide.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".