Meta-topologies define distinct anatomical classes of brain tumours linked to histology and survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The current World Health Organization classification integrates histological and molecular features of brain tumours. The aim of this study was to identify generalizable topological patterns with the potential to add an anatomical dimension to the classification of brain tumours. We applied non-negative matrix factorization as an unsupervised pattern discovery strategy to the fine-grained topographic tumour profiles of 936 patients with neuroepithelial tumours and brain metastases. From the anatomical features alone, this machine learning algorithm enabled the extraction of latent topological tumour patterns, termed meta-topologies. The optimal part-based representation was automatically determined in 10 000 split-half iterations. We further characterized each meta-topology’s unique histopathologic profile and survival probability, thus linking important biological and clinical information to the underlying anatomical patterns. In neuroepithelial tumours, six meta-topologies were extracted, each detailing a transpallial pattern with distinct parenchymal and ventricular compositions. We identified one infratentorial, one allopallial, three neopallial (parieto-occipital, frontal, temporal) and one unisegmental meta-topology. Each meta-topology mapped to distinct histopathologic and molecular profiles. The unisegmental meta-topology showed the strongest anatomical–clinical link demonstrating a survival advantage in histologically identical tumours. Brain metastases separated to an infra- and supratentorial meta-topology with anatomical patterns highlighting their affinity to the cortico-subcortical boundary of arterial watershed areas.Using a novel data-driven approach, we identified generalizable topological patterns in both neuroepithelial tumours and brain metastases. Differences in the histopathologic profiles and prognosis of these anatomical tumour classes provide insights into the heterogeneity of tumour biology and might add to personalized clinical decision-making.
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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".