MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394908620 · doi:10.1200/po.23.00687

Tumor Size Is Not Everything: Advancing Radiomics as a Precision Medicine Biomarker in Oncology Drug Development and Clinical Care. A Report of a Multidisciplinary Workshop Coordinated by the RECIST Working Group

2024· article· en· W4394908620 on OpenAlexaff
Erica C. Nakajima, Amber L. Simpson, Jan Bogaerts, Elisabeth G.E. de Vries, Richard Kinh Gian, Elena Garralda, Gregory Goldmacher, Paul E. Kinahan, Philippe Lambin, Barbara LeStage, Qin Li, Frank Lin, Saskia Litière, Raquel Pérez-López, Nicholas Petrick, Lawrence H. Schwartz, Lesley Seymour, Lalitha Shankar, Scott A. Laurie

Bibliographic record

VenueJCO Precision Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaOttawa HospitalQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiomicsMultidisciplinary approachPrecision oncologyDrug developmentMedicineMedical physicsClinical trialOncologyPrecision medicinePatient careInternal medicineDrugPathologyPharmacologyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radiomics, the science of extracting quantifiable data from routine medical images, is a powerful tool that has many potential applications in oncology. The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Working Group (RWG) held a workshop in May 2022, which brought together various stakeholders to discuss the potential role of radiomics in oncology drug development and clinical trials, particularly with respect to response assessment. This article summarizes the results of that workshop, reviewing radiomics for the practicing oncologist and highlighting the work that needs to be done to move forward the incorporation of radiomics into clinical trials.

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)0.074
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0740.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0050.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.372 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCO Precision OncologySame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207