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 OpenAlexaff
Eva Serrão, Maximiliano Klug, Brian Moloney, Aaditeya Jhaveri, Roberto Lo Gullo, Katja Pinker, Gary D. Luker, Masoom A. Haider, Atul B. Shinagare, Xiaoyang Liu

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiology Imaging CancerSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207