A multimodal neural network with gradient blending improves predictions of survival and metastasis in sarcoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study is to develop a multimodal neural network (MMNN) model that analyzes clinical variables and MRI images of a soft tissue sarcoma (STS) patient, to predict overall survival and risk of distant metastases. We compare the performance of this MMNN to models based on clinical variables alone, radiomics models, and an unimodal neural network. We include patients aged 18 or older with biopsy-proven STS who underwent primary resection between January 1st, 2005, and December 31st, 2020 with complete outcome data and a pre-treatment MRI with both a T1 post-contrast sequence and a T2 fat-sat sequence available. A total of 9380 MRI slices containing sarcomas from 287 patients are available. Our MMNN accepts the entire 3D sarcoma volume from T1 and T2 MRIs and clinical variables. Gradient blending allows the clinical and image sub-networks to optimally converge without overfitting. Heat maps were generated to visualize the salient image features. Our MMNN outperformed all other models in predicting overall survival and the risk of distant metastases. The C-Index of our MMNN for overall survival is 0.77 and the C-Index for risk of distant metastases is 0.70. The provided heat maps demonstrate areas of sarcomas deemed most salient for predictions. Our multimodal neural network with gradient blending improves predictions of overall survival and risk of distant metastases in patients with soft tissue sarcoma. Future work enabling accurate subtype-specific predictions will likely utilize similar end-to-end multimodal neural network architecture and require prospective curation of high-quality data, the inclusion of genomic data, and the involvement of multiple centers through federated learning.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".