NIMG-25. IMPROVING THE NONINVASIVE CLASSIFICATION OF GLIOMA GENETIC SUBTYPE WITH DEEP LEARNING AND DIFFUSION-WEIGHTED IMAGING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In contrast to the WHO 2016 guidelines that use genetic alterations to further stratify patients within a designated grade, new recommendations suggest that IDH mutation status, followed by 1p19q-codeletion, should be used before grade when differentiating gliomas. Although most gliomas will be resected and their tissue evaluated with genetic profiling, non-invasive characterization of genetic subgroup can benefit patients where surgery is not otherwise advised or a fast turn-around is required for clinical trial eligibility. Prior studies have demonstrated the utility of using anatomical images and deep learning to distinguish either IDH-mutant from IDH-wildtype tumors or 1p19q-codeleted from non-codeleted lesions separately, but not combined or using the most recent recommendations for stratification. The goal of this study was to evaluate the effects of training strategy and incorporation of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) maps from diffusion-weighted imaging on predicting new genetic subgroups with deep learning. Using 414 patients with newly-diagnosed glioma (split 285/50/49 training/validation/test) and optimized training hyperparameters, we found that a 3-class approach with T1-post-contrast, T2-FLAIR, and ADC maps as inputs achieved the best performance for molecular subgroup classification, with overall accuracies of 86.0%[CI:0.839,1.0], 80.0%[CI:0.720,1.0], and 85.7%[CI:0.771,1.0] on training, validation, and test sets, respectively, and final test class accuracies of 95.2%(IDH-wildtype), 88.9%(IDH-mutated,1p19qintact), and 60%(IDHmutated,1p19q-codeleted). Creating an RGB-color image from 3 MRI images and applying transfer learning with a residual network architecture pretrained on ImageNet resulted in an 8% averaged increase in overall accuracy. Although classifying both IDH and 1p19q mutations together was overall advantageous compared with a tiered structure that first classified IDH mutational status, the 2-tiered approach better generalized to an independent multi-site dataset when only anatomical images were used. Including biologically relevant ADC images improved model generalization to our test set regardless of modeling approach, highlighting the utility of incorporating diffusion-weighted imaging in future multi-site analyses of molecular subgroup.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".