MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297152878 · doi:10.3390/curroncol29100542

Noninvasive Determination of the IDH Status of Gliomas Using MRI and MRI-Based Radiomics: Impact on Diagnosis and Prognosis

2022· review· en· W4297152878 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yurong Li, Qin Qin, Yumeng Zhang, Yuandong Cao

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiomicsIsocitrate dehydrogenaseMedicineIDH1GliomaMagnetic resonance imagingOncologyPathologyRadiologyCancer researchMutationBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gliomas are the most common primary malignant brain tumors in adults. The fifth edition of the WHO Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System, published in 2021, provided molecular and practical approaches to CNS tumor taxonomy. Currently, molecular features are essential for differentiating the histological subtypes of gliomas, and recent studies have emphasized the importance of isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutations in stratifying biologically distinct subgroups of gliomas. IDH plays a significant role in gliomagenesis, and the association of IDH status with prognosis is very clear. Recently, there has been much progress in conventional MR imaging (cMRI), advanced MR imaging (aMRI), and radiomics, which are widely used in the study of gliomas. These advances have resulted in an improved correlation between MR signs and IDH mutation status, which will complement the prediction of the IDH phenotype. Although imaging cannot currently substitute for genetic tests, imaging findings have shown promising signs of diagnosing glioma subtypes and evaluating the efficacy and prognosis of individualized molecular targeted therapy. This review focuses on the correlation between MRI and MRI-based radiomics and IDH gene-phenotype prediction, discussing the value and application of these techniques in the diagnosis and evaluation of the prognosis of gliomas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations32
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207