Diffusion-weighted imaging on an MRI-linear accelerator to identify adversely prognostic tumour regions in glioblastoma during chemoradiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and purpose Survival in glioblastoma might be extended by escalating the radiotherapy dose to treatment-resistant tumour and adapting to tumour changes. Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) on MRI-linear accelerators (MR-Linacs) could be used to identify a dose escalation target, but its prognostic value must be demonstrated. The purpose of this study was to determine whether MR-Linac DWI can assess treatment response in glioblastoma and whether changes in DWI show greater prognostic value than changes in the contrast-enhancing gross tumour volume (GTV). Materials and methods Seventy-five patients with glioblastoma were treated with chemoradiotherapy, of which 32 were treated on a 1.5T MRI-linear accelerator (MR-Linac). Patients were imaged with simulation MRI scanners (MR-sim) at weeks 2, 4, and 10 after the start of treatment. Twenty-eight patients had additional MR-Linac DWI sequences. Cox modelling was used to evaluate the correlation of overall and progression-free survival (OS and PFS) with clinical variables and volumetric changes in the GTV and low-ADC regions (ADC<1.25 µm 2 /ms within GTV). Results In total, 479 MR-Linac DWI and 289 MR-sim DWI datasets were analyzed. MR-Linac low-ADC changes between weeks 2 and 5 inclusive were prognostic for OS (hazard ratio lower limits ≥1.2, p-values ≤.02). MR-sim low-ADC changes showed greater correlation with OS and PFS than GTV changes (e.g., OS hazard ratio at week 2 was 3.4 (p<.001) for low-ADC versus 2.0 (p=.022) for GTV). Conclusion MR-Linac DWI can measure low-ADC tumour volumes that correlate with OS and PFS better than contrast-enhancing GTV. Low-ADC regions could serve as dose escalation targets.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".