Multicenter imaging outcomes study of The Cancer Genome Atlas glioblastoma patient cohort: imaging predictors of overall and progression-free survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite an aggressive therapeutic approach, the prognosis for most patients with glioblastoma (GBM) remains poor. The aim of this study was to determine the significance of preoperative MRI variables, both quantitative and qualitative, with regard to overall and progression-free survival in GBM. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 94 untreated GBM patients from the Cancer Imaging Archive who had pretreatment MRI and corresponding patient outcomes and clinical information in The Cancer Genome Atlas. Qualitative imaging assessments were based on the Visually Accessible Rembrandt Images feature-set criteria. Volumetric parameters were obtained of the specific tumor components: contrast enhancement, necrosis, and edema/invasion. Cox regression was used to assess prognostic and survival significance of each image. RESULTS: Univariable Cox regression analysis demonstrated 10 imaging features and 2 clinical variables to be significantly associated with overall survival. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that tumor-enhancing volume (P = .03) and eloquent brain involvement (P < .001) were independent prognostic indicators of overall survival. In the multivariable Cox analysis of the volumetric features, the edema/invasion volume of more than 85 000 mm(3) and the proportion of enhancing tumor were significantly correlated with higher mortality (Ps = .004 and .003, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative MRI parameters have a significant prognostic role in predicting survival in patients with GBM, thus making them useful for patient stratification and endpoint biomarkers in clinical trials.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".