MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398143702 · doi:10.1007/s00330-024-10788-3

Validation of the standardization framework SSTR-RADS 1.0 for neuroendocrine tumors using the novel SSTR‑targeting peptide [18F]SiTATE

2024· article· en· W4398143702 on OpenAlexaff
R. Ebner, AW Lohse, Matthias P. Fabritius, Johannes Rübenthaler, Carmen Wängler, Björn Wängler, Ralf Schirrmacher, Friederike Völter, Helen Schmid, Lena M. Unterrainer, Osman Öcal, A Hinterberger, Christine Spitzweg, Christoph J. Auernhammer, Thomas Geyer, Jens Ricke, Peter Bartenstein, Adrien Holzgreve, Freba Grawe

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Radiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStandardizationNeuroendocrine tumorsNeuroradiologyInterventional radiologyRadiologyMedical physicsPathologyComputer scienceNeurology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objectives Somatostatin receptor positron emission tomography/computed tomography (SSTR-PET/CT) using [ 68 Ga]-labeled tracers is a widely used imaging modality for neuroendocrine tumors (NET). Recently, [ 18 F]SiTATE, a SiFAlin tagged [Tyr3]-octreotate (TATE) PET tracer, has shown great potential due to favorable clinical characteristics. We aimed to evaluate the reproducibility of Somatostatin Receptor-Reporting and Data System 1.0 (SSTR-RADS 1.0) for structured interpretation and treatment planning of NET using [ 18 F]SiTATE. Methods Four readers assessed [ 18 F]SiTATE-PET/CT of 95 patients according to the SSTR-RADS 1.0 criteria at two different time points. Each reader evaluated up to five target lesions per scan. The overall scan score and the decision on peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) were considered. Inter- and intra-reader agreement was determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results The ICC analysis on the inter-reader agreement using SSTR-RADS 1.0 for identical target lesions (ICC ≥ 85%), overall scan score (ICC ≥ 90%), and the decision to recommend PRRT (ICC ≥ 85%) showed excellent agreement. However, significant differences were observed in recommending PRRT among experienced readers (ER) ( p = 0.020) and inexperienced readers (IR) ( p = 0.004). Compartment-based analysis demonstrated good to excellent inter-reader agreement for most organs (ICC ≥ 74%), except for lymph nodes (ICC ≥ 53%). Conclusion SSTR-RADS 1.0 represents a highly reproducible and consistent framework system for stratifying SSTR-targeted PET/CT scans, even using the novel SSTR-ligand [ 18 F]SiTATE. Some inter-reader variability was observed regarding the evaluation of uptake intensity prior to PRRT as well as compartment scoring of lymph nodes, indicating that those categories require special attention during further clinical validation and might be refined in a future SSTR-RADS version 1.1. Clinical relevance statement SSTR-RADS 1.0 is a consistent framework for categorizing somatostatin receptor-targeted PET/CT scans when using [ 18 F]SiTATE. The framework serves as a valuable tool for facilitating and improving the management of patients with NET. Key Points SSTR-RADS 1.0 is a valuable tool for managing patients with NET . SSTR-RADS 1.0 categorizes patients with showing strong agreement across diverse reader expertise . As an alternative to [ 68 Ga]-labeled PET/CT in neuroendocrine tumor imaging, SSTR-RADS 1.0 reliably classifies [ 18 F]SiTATE-PET/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 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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.418
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean RadiologySame topicNeuroendocrine Tumor Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207