Predicting Survival in Patients with Glioblastoma Using MRI Radiomic Features Extracted from Radiation Planning Volumes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Quantitative image analysis using pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been able to predict survival in patients with glioblastoma (GBM). The study explored the role of postoperative radiation (RT) planning MRI-based radiomics to predict the outcomes, with features extracted from the gross tumor volume (GTV) and clinical target volume (CTV). Methods: Patients with IDH-wildtype GBM treated with adjuvant RT having MRI as a part of RT planning process were included in the study. 546 features were extracted from each GTV and CTV. A LASSO Cox model was applied, and internal validation was performed using leave-one-out cross-validation with overall survival as endpoint. Cross-validated time-dependent area under curve (AUC) was constructed to test the efficacy of the radiomics model, and clinical features were used to generate a combined model. Analysis was done for the entire group and in individual surgical groups-gross total excision (GTR), subtotal resection (STR), and biopsy. Results: 235 patients were included in the study with 57, 118, and 60 in the GTR, STR, and biopsy subgroup, respectively. Using the radiomics model, binary risk groups were feasible in the entire cohort (p<0.01) and biopsy group (p=0.04), but not in the other 2 surgical groups individually. The integrated AUC (iAUC) was 0.613 for radiomics-based classification in the biopsy subgroup, which improved to 0.632 with the inclusion of clinical features. Conclusion: Imaging features extracted from the GTV and CTV regions can lead to risk-stratification of GBM undergoing biopsy, while it was redundant for patients with GTR and STR.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".