Diagnostic, Therapeutic, and Prognostic Applications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the Clinical Management of Brain Metastases (BMs)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain metastases (BMs) are the most common intracranial tumors in adults. Their heterogeneity, potential multifocality, and complex biomolecular behavior pose significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to revolutionize BM diagnosis by facilitating early lesion detection, precise imaging segmentation, and non-invasive molecular characterization. Machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) models have shown promising results in differentiating BMs from other intracranial tumors with similar imaging characteristics-such as gliomas and primary central nervous system lymphomas (PCNSLs)-and predicting tumor features (e.g., genetic mutations) that can guide individualized and targeted therapies. Intraoperatively, AI-driven systems can enable optimal tumor resection by integrating functional brain maps into preoperative imaging, thus facilitating the identification and safeguarding of eloquent brain regions through augmented reality (AR)-assisted neuronavigation. Even postoperatively, AI can be instrumental for radiotherapy planning personalization through the optimization of dose distribution, maximizing disease control while minimizing adjacent healthy tissue damage. Applications in systemic chemo- and immunotherapy include predictive insights into treatment responses; AI can analyze genomic and radiomic features to facilitate the selection of the most suitable, patient-specific treatment regimen, especially for those whose disease demonstrates specific genetic profiles such as epidermal growth factor receptor mutations (e.g., EGFR, HER2). Moreover, AI-based prognostic models can significantly ameliorate survival and recurrence risk prediction, further contributing to follow-up strategy personalization. Despite these advancements and the promising landscape, multiple challenges-including data availability and variability, decision-making interpretability, and ethical, legal, and regulatory concerns-limit the broader implementation of AI into the everyday clinical management of BMs. Future endeavors should thus prioritize the development of generalized AI models, the combination of large and diverse datasets, and the integration of clinical and molecular data into imaging, in an effort to maximally enhance the clinical application of AI in BM care and optimize patient outcomes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".