MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886752543 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2018-660

Abstract 660: Integration of radiomics with "omic" analyses to predict survival in newly diagnosed IDH-1 wild-type glioblastoma

2018· article· en· W2886752543 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Daniel

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiomicsSubtypingIDH1Isocitrate dehydrogenaseGlioblastomaComputational biologyOmicsPhenotypeBiologyTranscriptomeGliomaProportional hazards modelOncologyMedicinePathologyBioinformaticsInternal medicineCancer researchRadiologyGeneGeneticsComputer scienceGene expressionMutation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most commonly diagnosed glioma and has the poorest median survival of all brain tumours at only 14 months. Despite intensive characterisation of this disease through ‘omic' investigations which has led to the identification of critical molecular drivers of malignancy, only a limited selection of biomarkers have proven to be clinically relevant in predicting patient survival. One reason for this lack of success is the existence of intratumoural heterogeneity, where individual tumours can harbour spatially separated molecular and phenotypic diversity, thereby limiting the insight which ‘omic' analysis of small biopsy specimens can impart. Radiomics involves high-throughput mining of quantitative image features via image acquisition, region of interest segmentation and feature extraction from standard MRI scans and relating extracted feature values to molecular, phenotypic and clinical properties. Notably, radiomics derives features from the whole tumour mass and therefore overcomes limitations associated with intratumoural heterogeneity. As such, we sought to investigate the ability for radiomics to describe tumour characteristics and integrate radiomics alongside genomics and transcriptomics to derive a prognostic model for IDH1 wild-type GBM. We observed 2 radiomic clusters in IDH1-wild-type GBM which each had an equivalent distribution of each of the four molecular subtypes. Whilst radiomic clusters themselves were not predictive of survival, three radiomic features were able to separate patients into long and short survival groups. Integration of genomic and transcriptomic features alongside radiomic analysis increased the predictive strength of our model. Finally, we found an association between longer survival in patients with IDH1 wild-type GBM and increased expression of the complement system. Our observations suggest that integration of radiomics alongside ‘omic' investigations offer a greater ability to predict survival in IDH1 wild-type GBM and suggests a role for the innate immune system in driving patient outcome. Citation Format: Paul M. Daniel. Integration of radiomics with "omic" analyses to predict survival in newly diagnosed IDH-1 wild-type glioblastoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 660.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.374 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207