Finding Reproducible and Prognostic Radiomic Features in Variable Slice Thickness Contrast Enhanced CT of Colorectal Liver Metastases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Establishing the reproducibility of radiomic signatures is a critical step in the path to clinical adoption of quantitative imaging biomarkers; however, radiomic signatures must also be meaningfully related to an outcome of clinical importance to be of value for personalized medicine. In this study, we analyze both the reproducibility and prognostic value of radiomic features extracted from the liver parenchyma and largest liver metastases in contrast enhanced CT scans of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). A prospective cohort of 81 patients from two major US cancer centers was used to establish the reproducibility of radiomic features extracted from images reconstructed with different slice thicknesses. A publicly available, single-center cohort of 197 preoperative scans from patients who underwent hepatic resection for treatment of CRLM was used to evaluate the prognostic value of features and models to predict overall survival. A standard set of 93 features was extracted from all images, with a set of eight different extractor settings. The feature extraction settings producing the most reproducible, as well as the most prognostically discriminative feature values were highly dependent on both the region of interest and the specific feature in question. While the best overall predictive model was produced using features extracted with a particular setting, without accounting for reproducibility, (C-index = 0.630 (0.603-0.649)) an equivalent-performing model (C-index = 0.629 (0.605-0.645)) was produced by pooling features from all extraction settings, and thresholding features with low reproducibility (CCC ≥ 0.85), prior to feature selection. Our findings support a data-driven approach to feature extraction and selection, preferring the inclusion of many features, and narrowing feature selection based on reproducibility when relevant data is available.
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 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".