The [18F]F-FDG PET/CT Radiomics Classifier of Histologic Subtypes and Anatomical Disease Origins across Various Malignancies: A Proof-of-Principle Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We aimed to investigate whether [18F]F-FDG-PET/CT-derived radiomics can classify histologic subtypes and determine the anatomical origin of various malignancies. In this IRB-approved retrospective study, 391 patients (age = 66.7 ± 11.2) with pulmonary (n = 142), gastroesophageal (n = 128) and head and neck (n = 121) malignancies were included. Image segmentation and feature extraction were performed semi-automatically. Two models (all possible subset regression [APS] and recursive partitioning) were employed to predict histology (squamous cell carcinoma [SCC; n = 219] vs. adenocarcinoma [AC; n = 172]), the anatomical origin, and histology plus anatomical origin. The recursive partitioning algorithm outperformed APS to determine histology (sensitivity 0.90 vs. 0.73; specificity 0.77 vs. 0.65). The recursive partitioning algorithm also revealed good predictive ability regarding anatomical origin. Particularly, pulmonary malignancies were identified with high accuracy (sensitivity 0.93; specificity 0.98). Finally, a model for the synchronous prediction of histology and anatomical disease origin resulted in high accuracy in determining gastroesophageal AC (sensitivity 0.88; specificity 0.92), pulmonary AC (sensitivity 0.89; specificity 0.88) and head and neck SCC (sensitivity 0.91; specificity 0.92). Adding PET-features was associated with marginal incremental value for both the prediction of histology and origin in the APS model. Overall, our study demonstrated a good predictive ability to determine patients’ histology and anatomical origin using [18F]F-FDG-PET/CT-derived radiomics features, mainly from CT.
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 | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".