Integrated models incorporating radiologic and radiomic features predict meningioma grade, local failure, and overall survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background We investigated prognostic models based on clinical, radiologic, and radiomic feature to preoperatively identify meningiomas at risk for poor outcomes. Methods Retrospective review was performed for 303 patients who underwent resection of 314 meningiomas (57% World Health Organization grade I, 35% grade II, and 8% grade III) at two independent institutions, which comprised primary and external datasets. For each patient in the primary dataset, 16 radiologic and 172 radiomic features were extracted from preoperative magnetic resonance images, and prognostic features for grade, local failure (LF) or overall survival (OS) were identified using the Kaplan–Meier method, log-rank tests and recursive partitioning analysis. Regressions and random forests were used to generate and test prognostic models, which were validated using the external dataset. Results Multivariate analysis revealed that apparent diffusion coefficient hypointensity (HR 5.56, 95% CI 2.01–16.7, P = .002) was associated with high grade meningioma, and low sphericity was associated both with increased LF (HR 2.0, 95% CI 1.1–3.5, P = .02) and worse OS (HR 2.94, 95% CI 1.47–5.56, P = .002). Both radiologic and radiomic predictors of adverse meningioma outcomes were significantly associated with molecular markers of aggressive meningioma biology, such as somatic mutation burden, DNA methylation status, and FOXM1 expression. Integrated prognostic models combining clinical, radiologic, and radiomic features demonstrated improved accuracy for meningioma grade, LF, and OS (area under the curve 0.78, 0.75, and 0.78, respectively) compared to models based on clinical features alone. Conclusions Preoperative radiologic and radiomic features such as apparent diffusion coefficient and sphericity can predict tumor grade, LF, and OS in patients with meningioma.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".