ArticleInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics2026
An Explainable Deep Model for Risk Scoring and Accurate Radionecrosis Identification Following Brain Metastasis Stereotactic Radiosurgery.
Article in International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAs survival improves for patients with brain metastases (BM), distinguishing local recurrence (LR) from radionecrosis (RN) is a growing neuro-oncologic challenge. We aimed to develop an explainable deep learning model to noninvasively distinguish RN from LR in patients with non-small cell lung cancer following stereotactic radiosurgery. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A second-order heavy-ball neural ordinary differential equation (HBNODE) deep learning framework was designed. It enabled dynamic tracking of input evolution within a deep neural network, integrating magnetic resonance (MR), clinical, and genomic features into a unified Image-Genomic-Clinical space. This allowed visualization of sample trajectories during model execution. Layer-wise relevance propagation (LRP) was applied to quantify individual nonimaging feature contributions and their influence on diagnosis. Within the Image-Genomic-Clinical space, a decision-making field (F) was reconstructed. The temporal evolution of F enabled quantitative comparison of cumulative contributions from each feature. Key intermediate states, defined as locoregional equilibrium points (∇F = 0), were identified and aggregated using a nonparametric model to optimize prediction. High-contributing features were selected via k-means clustering of LRP results, forming a risk score model for RN versus LR differentiation. The data set included 142 BM lesions from 103 non-small cell lung cancer patients, incorporating 3-month post-stereotactic radiosurgery T1 + C magnetic resonance imaging, 7 genomic biomarkers, and 7 clinical parameters. An 8:2 ratio was used for training and independent testing.
resultsThree high-contributing features, age (×1), ALK rearrangement status (×0.84), and PD-L1 expression status (×0.76), were identified by LRP and used to constructs the risk score. The risk score model outperformed the model using all unweighted clinical/genomic features and an MR-only deep neural network. The HBNODE model, embedding the risk score within deep space, achieved the best performance across all metrics.
conclusionsThe derived risk score, based on nonimaging features, is a simple and rapid indicator for distinguishing RN from LR. When integrated with magnetic resonance imaging in the HBNODE model, it further enhanced predictive performance while maintaining high explainability, highlighting its potential as a clinical decision-aid tool for BM management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.