MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403686025 · doi:10.1227/neu.0000000000003246

In Reply: A Data-Driven Approach to Predicting 5-Aminolevulinic Acid-Induced Fluorescence and World Health Organization Grade in Newly Diagnosed Diffuse Gliomas

2024· article· en· W4403686025 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael Müther, Walter Stummer

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurosurgery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGliomaPathologyCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To the Editor: We greatly appreciate the authors' letter1 regarding our publication “A Data-Driven Approach to Predicting 5-Aminolevulinic Acid-Induced Fluorescence and World Health Organization Grade in Newly Diagnosed Diffuse Gliomas.” Contrast enhancement is a relevant predictor of intraoperative 5-aminolevulinic acid (5-ALA) fluorescence in our logistic regression–based mode. Our observations can be explained by the fact that the brain-blood barrier in diffuse lower-grade gliomas (DLGG) is semipermeable to 5-ALA.2 Our group has shown that higher 5-ALA doses result in more protoporphyrin IX conversion, an observation with implications for future dosing in DLGG.3 Having given our last analysis further thought under present circumstances, however, the question we were asking could perfectly be addressed using the machine learning pattern recognition, allowing to potentially incorporate multidimensional factors beyond contrast enhancement for predicting intraoperative 5-ALA fluorescence in a more holistic way than our older analyses. Our group is currently working on several such projects to predict intraoperative 5-ALA fluorescence in DLGG. Solid prediction modeling may translate into lower costs by identifying those patients in whom application of 5-ALA will not lead to intraoperative fluorescence as observed by the surgeon. At the same time, however, reporting guidelines need to be respected to maintain the high quality of research and higher yields of prediction.4 As stated by Barrie and Detchou, it would definitely be desirable to corroborate our findings in a prospective study setting. We are in the active stage of conceptualizing a sampling study on tumor heterogeneity as depicted by 5-ALA fluorescence and amino acid PET using machine learning algorithms, in diffuse lower-grade gliomas. Finally, we again thank the authors for giving us the chance of raising additional points on prediction of 5-ALA fluorescence in DLGG.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.074
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.074
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0170.027
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.310
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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 venueNeurosurgerySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207