Radiomics and Radiogenomics in Pelvic Oncology: Current Applications and Future Directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radiomics refers to the conversion of medical imaging into high-throughput, quantifiable data in order to analyse disease patterns, guide prognosis and aid decision making. Radiogenomics is an extension of radiomics that combines conventional radiomics techniques with molecular analysis in the form of genomic and transcriptomic data, serving as an alternative to costly, labour-intensive genetic testing. Data on radiomics and radiogenomics in the field of pelvic oncology remain novel concepts in the literature. We aim to perform an up-to-date analysis of current applications of radiomics and radiogenomics in the field of pelvic oncology, particularly focusing on the prediction of survival, recurrence and treatment response. Several studies have applied these concepts to colorectal, urological, gynaecological and sarcomatous diseases, with individual efficacy yet poor reproducibility. This article highlights the current applications of radiomics and radiogenomics in pelvic oncology, as well as the current limitations and future directions. Despite a rapid increase in publications investigating the use of radiomics and radiogenomics in pelvic oncology, the current evidence is limited by poor reproducibility and small datasets. In the era of personalised medicine, this novel field of research has significant potential, particularly for predicting prognosis and guiding therapeutic decisions. Future research may provide fundamental data on how we treat this cohort of patients, with the aim of reducing the exposure of high-risk patients to highly morbid procedures.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".