Could CT Radiomic Analysis of Benign Adrenal Incidentalomas Suggest the Need for Further Endocrinological Evaluation?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied the application of CT texture analysis in adrenal incidentalomas with baseline characteristics of benignity that are highly suggestive of adenoma to find whether there is a correlation between the extracted features and clinical data. Patients with hormonal hypersecretion may require medical attention, even if it does not cause any symptoms. A total of 206 patients affected by adrenal incidentaloma were retrospectively enrolled and divided into non-functioning adrenal adenomas (NFAIs, n = 115) and mild autonomous cortisol secretion (MACS, n = 91). A total of 136 texture parameters were extracted in the unenhanced phase for each volume of interest (VOI). Random Forest was used in the training and validation cohorts to test the accuracy of CT textural features and cortisol-related comorbidities in identifying MACS patients. Twelve parameters were retained in the Random Forest radiomic model, and in the validation cohort, a high specificity (81%) and positive predictive value (74%) were achieved. Notably, if the clinical data were added to the model, the results did not differ. Radiomic analysis of adrenal incidentalomas, in unenhanced CT scans, could screen with a good specificity those patients who will need a further endocrinological evaluation for mild autonomous cortisol secretion, regardless of the clinical information about the cortisol-related comorbidities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".