MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of gadopiclenol on decision making in patients with brain metastases: A post-hoc study.

2024· article· en· W4400273273 on OpenAlexaff
Frank A. Giordano, Jens Fleckenstein, Miriam Eckl, Florian Stieler, Martin Bendszus, Marco Essig, Frederik Wenz, Gustavo R. Sarria

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune Response
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePost-hoc analysisBrain metastasisOncologyInternal medicineCancerMetastasis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e14003 Background: Gadopiclenol (Elucirem, Guerbet, France) is a new high relaxivity macrocyclic gadolinium-based contrast agent (GBCA), recently approved by the FDA and EMA at the dose of 0.05 mmol/kg. The aim of this post-hoc analysis was to evaluate the impact of contrast-enhanced MRI with gadopiclenol at 0.1 mmol/kg on decision making and radiotherapy (RT) treatment planning of brain metastases (BM). Methods: This is a post-hoc analysis of data from a phase IIb study where patients underwent two separate MRI examinations, one with gadopiclenol at 0.025, 0.05, 0.1 or 0.2 mmol/kg and one with gadobenate dimeglumine at 0.1 mmol/kg. MR images of patients who received both GBCAs at 0.1 mmol/kg, with ≥1 BM detected in either of the scans, were subjected to a blinded reader analysis and contouring by two radiation oncology experts. For each patient, treatment plans (stereotactic radiosurgery [SRS] or whole-brain radiotherapy [WBRT]) were determined for both MRIs, with the gross target volume (GTV) indicating the contrast-enhancing aspects of the tumor. Mean GTVs and normal tissue volumes receiving 12 Gy (V12), as well as the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) were obtained for the paired contours. The Spearman´s rank (ρ) correlation was additionally calculated. Furthermore, three experts blindly evaluated the contrast enhancement of each lesion for contouring purposes and subjectively qualified them as “better”, in detriment of the counterpart, or “equal”. Results: In total, images from 13 adult patients were analyzed. MRI with gadopiclenol depicted additional BM as compared with gadobenate dimeglumine in 7 patients (54%). The treatment plan was changed in 2 patients (15%), from no treatment to SRS and from SRS to WBRT. Gadopiclenol depicted additional BM in these 2 patients (from 0 and 10 BM with gadobenate dimeglumine to 1 and 15 BM with gadopiclenol). The mean GTVs and V12 were comparable between gadopiclenol and gadobenate dimeglumine (p=0.694, p=1.974). The mean DSC was 0.70 (SD: 0.14, ρ0.82). From a total of 36 answers, contrast enhancement was qualified as better with gadopiclenol in 21 (58.3%) evaluations, better with gadobenate dimeglumine in 8 (22.2%) evaluations, while no difference was observed in 7 (19.4%) evaluations. Conclusions: Gadopiclenol at 0.1 mmol/kg improved BM detection and contrast enhancement with potential impact on RT treatment decisions.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.432 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune ResponseFrench-language works237,207