MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392595924 · doi:10.3390/cancers16061090

Evaluating Outcome Prediction via Baseline, End-of-Treatment, and Delta Radiomics on PET-CT Images of Primary Mediastinal Large B-Cell Lymphoma

2024· article· en· W4392595924 on OpenAlexafffund
Fereshteh Yousefirizi, Claire Gowdy, Ivan S. Klyuzhin, Maziar Sabouri, Anna Hayden, Donald Wilson, Laurie H. Sehn, David W. Scott, Christian Steidl, Kerry J. Savage, Carlos Uribe, Arman Rahmim

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSpinal Cord Injury BCUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Children's Hospital
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchBC Cancer Foundation
KeywordsMedicineRadiomicsNuclear medicineStandardized uptake valueFeature selectionRadiologyProgression-free survivalPositron emission tomographyChemotherapyArtificial intelligenceInternal medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Accurate outcome prediction is important for making informed clinical decisions in cancer treatment. In this study, we assessed the feasibility of using changes in radiomic features over time (Delta radiomics: absolute and relative) following chemotherapy, to predict relapse/progression and time to progression (TTP) of primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) patients. Material and Methods: Given the lack of standard staging PET scans until 2011, only 31 out of 103 PMBCL patients in our retrospective study had both pre-treatment and end-of-treatment (EoT) scans. Consequently, our radiomics analysis focused on these 31 patients who underwent [18F]FDG PET-CT scans before and after R-CHOP chemotherapy. Expert manual lesion segmentation was conducted on their scans for delta radiomics analysis, along with an additional 19 EoT scans, totaling 50 segmented scans for single time point analysis. Radiomics features (on PET and CT), along with maximum and mean standardized uptake values (SUVmax and SUVmean), total metabolic tumor volume (TMTV), tumor dissemination (Dmax), total lesion glycolysis (TLG), and the area under the curve of cumulative standardized uptake value-volume histogram (AUC-CSH) were calculated. We additionally applied longitudinal analysis using radial mean intensity (RIM) changes. For prediction of relapse/progression, we utilized the individual coefficient approximation for risk estimation (ICARE) and machine learning (ML) techniques (K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA), and Random Forest (RF)) including sequential feature selection (SFS) following correlation analysis for feature selection. For TTP, ICARE and CoxNet approaches were utilized. In all models, we used nested cross-validation (CV) (with 10 outer folds and 5 repetitions, along with 5 inner folds and 20 repetitions) after balancing the dataset using Synthetic Minority Oversampling TEchnique (SMOTE). Results: To predict relapse/progression using Delta radiomics between the baseline (staging) and EoT scans, the best performances in terms of accuracy and F1 score (F1 score is the harmonic mean of precision and recall, where precision is the ratio of true positives to the sum of true positives and false positives, and recall is the ratio of true positives to the sum of true positives and false negatives) were achieved with ICARE (accuracy = 0.81 ± 0.15, F1 = 0.77 ± 0.18), RF (accuracy = 0.89 ± 0.04, F1 = 0.87 ± 0.04), and LDA (accuracy = 0.89 ± 0.03, F1 = 0.89 ± 0.03), that are higher compared to the predictive power achieved by using only EoT radiomics features. For the second category of our analysis, TTP prediction, the best performer was CoxNet (LASSO feature selection) with c-index = 0.67 ± 0.06 when using baseline + Delta features (inclusion of both baseline and Delta features). The TTP results via Delta radiomics were comparable to the use of radiomics features extracted from EoT scans for TTP analysis (c-index = 0.68 ± 0.09) using CoxNet (with SFS). The performance of Deauville Score (DS) for TTP was c-index = 0.66 ± 0.09 for n = 50 and 0.67 ± 03 for n = 31 cases when using EoT scans with no significant differences compared to the radiomics signature from either EoT scans or baseline + Delta features (p-value> 0.05). Conclusion: This work demonstrates the potential of Delta radiomics and the importance of using EoT scans to predict progression and TTP from PMBCL [18F]FDG PET-CT scans.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.633
Threshold uncertainty score0.695

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations26
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207