Associating<i>IDH</i>and<i>TERT</i>Mutations in Glioma with Diffusion Anisotropy in Normal-Appearing White Matter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: IDH and TERT mutations might infiltratively manifest within normal-appearing white matter with specific phenotypes such as microstructural changes undetectable by standard MR imaging contrasts but potentially associable with DTI variables. The aim of this retrospective glioma study was to statistically investigate IDH and TERT associations and classifications with DTI reported microstructure in normal-appearing white matter. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective data from patients imaged between March 2012 and February 2016 were analyzed by grouping them as IDH–TERT subgroups and by IDH and TERT mutation status. DTI variables in the IDH-TERT subgroups were first identified by the Kruskal-Wallis test, followed by Dunn-Šidák multiple comparisons with Bonferroni correction. IDH and TERT mutations were compared with the Mann-Whitney U test. Classification by thresholding was tested using receiver operating characteristic analysis. RESULTS: Of 170 patients, 70 patients (mean age, 43.73 [SD, 15.32] years; 40 men) were included. Whole-brain normal-appearing white matter fractional anisotropy (FA) and relative anisotropy (RA) (P = .002) were significantly higher and the contralateral-ipsilateral hemispheric differences, ΔFA and ΔRA, (P < .001) were significantly lower in IDHonly patients compared with TERTonly, with a higher whole-brain normal-appearing white matter FA and RA (P = .01) and ΔFA and ΔRA (P = .002) compared to double positive patients. Whole-brain normal-appearing white matter ADC (P = .02), RD (P = .001), λ2 (P = .001), and λ3 (P = .001) were higher in IDH wild-type. Whole-brain normal-appearing white matter λ1 (AD) (P = .003), FA (P < .001), and RA (P = .003) were higher, but Δλ1 (P = .002), ΔFA, and ΔRA (P < .001) were lower in IDH mutant versus IDH wild-type. ΔFA (P = .01) and ΔRA (P = .02) were significantly higher in TERT mutant versus TERT wild-type. CONCLUSIONS: Axial and nonaxial diffusivities, anisotropy indices in the normal-appearing white matter and their interhemispheric differences demonstrated microstructural differences between IDH and TERT mutations, with the potential for classification methods.
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".