Development of a Radiomics-Based Model to Predict Graft Fibrosis in Liver Transplant Recipients: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Liver Transplantation is complicated by recurrent fibrosis in 40% of recipients. We evaluated the ability of clinical and radiomic features to flag patients at risk of developing future graft fibrosis. CT scans of 254 patients at 3–6 months post-liver transplant were retrospectively analyzed. Volumetric radiomic features were extracted from the portal phase using an Artificial Intelligence-based tool (PyRadiomics). The primary endpoint was clinically significant (≥F2) graft fibrosis. A 10-fold cross-validated LASSO model using clinical and radiomic features was developed. In total, 75 patients (29.5%) developed ≥F2 fibrosis by a median of 19 (4.3–121.8) months. The maximum liver attenuation at the venous phase (a radiomic feature reflecting venous perfusion), primary etiology, donor/recipient age, recurrence of disease, brain-dead donor, tacrolimus use at 3 months, and APRI score at 3 months were predictive of ≥F2 fibrosis. The combination of radiomics and the clinical features increased the AUC to 0.811 from 0.793 for the clinical-only model (p = 0.008) and from 0.664 for the radiomics-only model (p < 0.001) to predict future ≥F2 fibrosis. This pilot study exploring the role of radiomics demonstrates that the addition of radiomic features in a clinical model increased the model’s performance. Further studies are required to investigate the generalizability of this experimental tool.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".