MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413998229 · doi:10.1002/mp.18078

Feature level quantitative ultrasound and CT information fusion to predict the outcome of head & neck cancer radiotherapy treatment: Enhanced principal component analysis

2025· article· en· W4413998229 on OpenAlexafffund
Amir Moslemi, Aryan Safakish, Lakshmanan Sannachi, David Alberico, Gregory J. Czarnota

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Metropolitan UniversityHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchTerry Fox Research Institute
KeywordsPrincipal component analysisArtificial intelligenceRadiation therapySupport vector machinePattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Medical imagingComputer scienceMedicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Radiation therapy is a common treatment for head and neck (H&N) cancers. Radiomic features, which are determined from biomedical imaging, can be effective biomarkers used to assess tumor heterogeneity and have been used to predict response to treatment. However, most studies employ only a single biomedical imaging modality to determine radiomic features. Purpose The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of radiomic feature fusion, combining quantitative ultrasound spectroscopy (QUS) and computed tomography (CT) imaging modalities, in predicting the outcomes of radiation therapy for H&N cancer prior to start. Method An enhanced version of principal component analysis (EPCA) was proposed to fuse 70 radiomic features from CT and 476 radiomic features from QUS in order to predict the response to radiation therapy in patients with H&N cancers (partial response vs. complete response). EPCA is a PCA method with Hessian matrix regularization and ‐regularization, and was proposed here for information fusion at a feature level. Leave‐one‐patient‐out methodology with bootstrap was applied to conduct train‐test analysis and fused features were used to train two (support vector machine (SVM) and k‐nearest neighbor (KNN)) classifiers to build a predictive model in order to predict response to treatment for patients with H&N cancers. Five‐fold (5) cross validation was applied on the training set to tune the hyperparameters of SVM and KNN classifiers. Consequently, the performance of classifiers was evaluated by examining accuracy (ACC), F1‐score (F1), balanced accuracy (BACC), Sensitivity (S n ), and Specificity ( S p ) metrics. Additionally, a two‐sided t ‐test was applied to the top principal components derived from EPCA methodology in order to assess the statistical significance of the selected components. The proposed method developed here was compared with minimum redundancy maximum relevance (mRMR) feature selection, conventional PCA, kernel PCA, autoencoder, and canonical correlation analysis (CCA). Additionally, we compared proposed EPCA with robust PCA and ‐norm constrained graph Laplacian PCA. Results Seventy‐one ( n = 71) (66 male (93%) and female (7chmch%)) H&N cancer patients were recruited with bulky metastatic neck lymph node (LN) involvement. Patients had a mean age of 59 ± 10 and 25 (35.2%) were complete responders and 46 (64.8%) were partial‐responders. In terms of predicting responses, the EPCA‐SVM classifier had better performance than EPCA‐KNN, and achieved 792% sensitivity, 842% specificity, 82 2% accuracy, 81 2% balanced accuracy, and 82 % area under curve (AUC). Results demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed method with superiority over mRMR feature selection, conventional PCA, kernel PCA, autoencoder, and CCA methods. Using an ablation study, EPCA was compared with robust PCA and ‐norm constrained graph Laplacian PCA. Results supported the superiority of EPCA over rPCA and ‐norm constrained graph Laplacian PCA. Three principal components were statistically significant. Additionally, we compared the proposed method with the use of QUS and CT as individual imaging modalities. The results demonstrated the effectiveness of feature‐level fusion in enhancing prediction accuracy. Conclusion The results demonstrated that the proposed predictive model is able to predict a binary H&N cancer treatment outcome, feature level fusion of CT and QUS radiomics has superiority over single imaging modality and EPCA is an effective approach to fuse the features.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207