MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399480494 · doi:10.3174/ajnr.a8375

Comparative Evaluation of Lower Gadolinium Doses for MR Imaging of Meningiomas: How Low Can We Go?

2024· article· en· W4399480494 on OpenAlexaff
Tshea Dowers, Ali Helmi, Achire N. Mbanwi, Paula Alcaide‐Leon

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMeningioma and schwannoma management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGadoliniumNuclear medicineMeningiomaMagnetic resonance imagingRadiologyEffective dose (radiation)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Gadolinium-based contrast agents are widely used for meningioma imaging; however, concerns exist regarding their side effects, cost, and environmental impact. At the standard gadolinium dose, most meningiomas show avid contrast enhancement suggesting that administering a smaller dose may be feasible. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a lower gadolinium dose on the differentiation between meningiomas and adjacent intracranial tissues. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 108 patients with presumed or confirmed meningiomas who underwent brain MRI at multiple doses of gadolinium were included in the study. The patients9 MRIs were categorized into three groups based on the gadolinium dose administered: Micro (approximately 25% of the standard dose), Low (approximately 62% of the standard dose) and Standard dose. Multi-reader qualitative visual assessment and quantitative relative signal differences calculations were performed to evaluate tumor differentiation from the cortex and from the dural venous sinus. The relative signal differences for each dose were analyzed using ANOVA for quantitative assessment and NcNemar for qualitative assessment. Additionally, non-inferiority testing was used to compare the Low and Micro doses to the Standard dose. RESULTS: Decreasing the gadolinium dose to a Low dose or a Micro dose resulted in a statistically significant decrease in signal difference between the tumor and the adjacent brain tissues (p<0.02). However, on visual assessment, the Low dose was non-inferior to the Standard dose. The proportion of cases with suboptimal differentiation was significantly higher for the Micro dose than for the Standard dose, both for the differentiation between the tumor and the cortex (p=0.041) and the differentiation between tumor and sinus (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Reducing the gadolinium dose to 62% of the standard level still allows for sufficient visual delineation of meningiomas from surrounding tissues. However, further reduction to 25% substantially compromises the ability to distinguish the tumor from adjacent structures and is, therefore, not advisable. ABBREVIATIONS: GBCAs = Gadolinium-based contrast agents; SSS = Superior Sagittal Sinus.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of NeuroradiologySame topicMeningioma and schwannoma managementFrench-language works237,207