Contrast-Enhanced Harmonic Endoscopic Ultrasonography for Prediction of Aggressiveness and Treatment Response in Patients with Pancreatic Lesions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Endoscopic ultrasonography represents a crucial aspect of the diagnosis of pancreatic lesions. The echo-endoscopic features of pancreatic lesions, particularly their contrast behavior with the advent of Contrast-Enhanced EUS (CE-EUS) and Contrast Enhanced Harmonic-EUS (CH-EUS), can predict a lesion's aggressiveness, depending on its nature. According to this, CH-EUS could be applied to structure an even more dedicated approach to patient care, for example, to ascertain eligibility for surgical intervention of a pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) or the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in cases deemed borderline resectable. In addition to PDAC, other significant issues pertain to the management of small neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs). In this context, CH-EUS can be crucial. The aim of this review is to underline the most recent evidence for EUS and CH-EUS applications in pancreatic lesion aggressiveness assessment and to focus on possible future research directions to further extend the application of CH-EUS in this field.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".