Simulated deep CT characterization of liver metastases with high-resolution filtered back projection reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Early diagnosis and accurate prognosis of colorectal cancer is critical for determining optimal treatment plans and maximizing patient outcomes, especially as the disease progresses into liver metastases. Computed tomography (CT) is a frontline tool for this task; however, the preservation of predictive radiomic features is highly dependent on the scanning protocol and reconstruction algorithm. We hypothesized that image reconstruction with a high-frequency kernel could result in a better characterization of liver metastases features via deep neural networks. This kernel produces images that appear noisier but preserve more sinogram information. A simulation pipeline was developed to study the effects of imaging parameters on the ability to characterize the features of liver metastases. This pipeline utilizes a fractal approach to generate a diverse population of shapes representing virtual metastases, and then it superimposes them on a realistic CT liver region to perform a virtual CT scan using CatSim. Datasets of 10,000 liver metastases were generated, scanned, and reconstructed using either standard or high-frequency kernels. These data were used to train and validate deep neural networks to recover crafted metastases characteristics, such as internal heterogeneity, edge sharpness, and edge fractal dimension. In the absence of noise, models scored, on average, 12.2% ( $$\alpha =0.012$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>α</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.012</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ) and 7.5% ( $$\alpha =0.049)$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>α</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.049</mml:mn> <mml:mo>)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> lower squared error for characterizing edge sharpness and fractal dimension, respectively, when using high-frequency reconstructions compared to standard. However, the differences in performance were statistically insignificant when a typical level of CT noise was simulated in the clinical scan. Our results suggest that high-frequency reconstruction kernels can better preserve information for downstream artificial intelligence-based radiomic characterization, provided that noise is limited. Future work should investigate the information-preserving kernels in datasets with clinical labels.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".