MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388302460 · doi:10.1148/rycan.220153

Current Status of Cancer Genomics and Imaging Phenotypes: What Radiologists Need to Know

2023· review· en· W4388302460 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology Imaging Cancer · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsRadiogenomicsMedicineGenomicsPrecision medicineEpigenomicsPersonalized medicineMedical physicsBioinformaticsPathologyRadiomicsRadiologyGenomeGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ongoing discoveries in cancer genomics and epigenomics have revolutionized clinical oncology and precision health care. This knowledge provides unprecedented insights into tumor biology and heterogeneity within a single tumor, among primary and metastatic lesions, and among patients with the same histologic type of cancer. Large-scale genomic sequencing studies also sparked the development of new tumor classifications, biomarkers, and targeted therapies. Because of the central role of imaging in cancer diagnosis and therapy, radiologists need to be familiar with the basic concepts of genomics, which are now becoming the new norm in oncologic clinical practice. By incorporating these concepts into clinical practice, radiologists can make their imaging interpretations more meaningful and specific, facilitate multidisciplinary clinical dialogue and interventions, and provide better patient-centric care. This review article highlights basic concepts of genomics and epigenomics, reviews the most common genetic alterations in cancer, and discusses the implications of these concepts on imaging by organ system in a case-based manner. This information will help stimulate new innovations in imaging research, accelerate the development and validation of new imaging biomarkers, and motivate efforts to bring new molecular and functional imaging methods to clinical radiology. Keywords: Oncology, Cancer Genomics, Epignomics, Radiogenomics, Imaging Markers Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2023

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.373 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it