Time-to-event overall survival prediction in glioblastoma multiforme patients using magnetic resonance imaging radiomics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Glioblastoma Multiforme (GBM) represents the predominant aggressive primary tumor of the brain with short overall survival (OS) time. We aim to assess the potential of radiomic features in predicting the time-to-event OS of patients with GBM using machine learning (ML) algorithms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred nineteen patients with GBM, who had T1-weighted contrast-enhanced and T2-FLAIR MRI sequences, along with clinical data and survival time, were enrolled. Image preprocessing methods included 64 bin discretization, Laplacian of Gaussian (LOG) filters with three Sigma values and eight variations of Wavelet Transform. Images were then segmented, followed by the extraction of 1212 radiomic features. Seven feature selection (FS) methods and six time-to-event ML algorithms were utilized. The combination of preprocessing, FS, and ML algorithms (12 × 7 × 6 = 504 models) was evaluated by multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Our multivariate analysis showed that the best prognostic FS/ML combinations are the Mutual Information (MI)/Cox Boost, MI/Generalized Linear Model Boosting (GLMB) and MI/Generalized Linear Model Network (GLMN), all of which were done via the LOG (Sigma = 1 mm) preprocessing method (C-index = 0.77). The LOG filter with Sigma = 1 mm preprocessing method, MI, GLMB and GLMN achieved significantly higher C-indices than other preprocessing, FS, and ML methods (all p values < 0.05, mean C-indices of 0.65, 0.70, and 0.64, respectively). CONCLUSION: ML algorithms are capable of predicting the time-to-event OS of patients using MRI-based radiomic and clinical features. MRI-based radiomics analysis in combination with clinical variables might appear promising in assisting clinicians in the survival prediction of patients with GBM. Further research is needed to establish the applicability of radiomics in the management of GBM in the clinic.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".