On the Prognosis of Multifocal Glioblastoma: An Evaluation Incorporating Volumetric MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Primary glioblastoma (GBM), IDH-wildtype, especially with multifocal appearance/growth (mGBM), is associated with very poor prognosis. Several clinical parameters have been identified to provide prognostic value in both unifocal GBM (uGBM) and mGBM, but information about the influence of radiological parameters on survival for mGBM cohorts is scarce. This study evaluated the prognostic value of several volumetric parameters derived from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Data from the Department of Neurosurgery, Leipzig University Hospital, were retrospectively analyzed. Patients treated between 2014 and 2019, aged older than 18 years and with adequate peri-operative MRI were included. Volumetric assessment was performed manually. One hundred and eighty-three patients were included. Survival of patients with mGBM was significantly shorter (p < 0.0001). Univariate analysis revealed extent of resection, adjuvant therapy regimen, residual tumor volume, tumor necrosis volume and ratio of tumor necrosis to initial volume as statistically significant for overall survival. In multivariate Cox regression, however, only EOR (for uGBM and the entire cohort) and adjuvant therapy were independently significant for survival. Decreased ratio of tumor necrosis to initial tumor volume and extent of resection were associated with prolonged survival in mGBM but failed to achieve statistical significance in multivariate analysis.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".