Fully-automated CT derived body composition analysis reveals sarcopenia in functioning adrenocortical carcinomas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Determination of body composition (the relative distribution of fat, muscle, and bone) has been used effectively to assess the risk of progression and overall clinical outcomes in different malignancies. Sarcopenia (loss of muscle mass) is especially associated with poor clinical outcomes in cancer. However, estimation of muscle mass through CT scan has been a cumbersome, manually intensive process requiring accurate contouring through dedicated personnel hours. Recently, fully automated technologies that can determine body composition in minutes have been developed and shown to be highly accurate in determining muscle, bone, and fat mass. We employed a fully automated technology, and analyzed images from a publicly available cancer imaging archive dataset (TCIA) and a tertiary academic center. The results show that adrenocortical carcinomas (ACC) have relatively sarcopenia compared to benign adrenal lesions. In addition, functional ACCs have accelerated sarcopenia compared to non-functional ACCs. Further longitudinal research might shed further light on the relationship between body component distribution and ACC prognosis, which will help us incorporate more nutritional strategies in cancer therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".