Improving Deep Learning Models for Pediatric Low-Grade Glioma Tumours Molecular Subtype Identification Using MRI-based 3D Probability Distributions of Tumour Location
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Pediatric low-grade gliomas (pLGG) are the most common brain tumour in children, and the molecular diagnosis of pLGG enables targeted treatment. We use MRI-based Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) for molecular subtype identification of pLGG and augment the models using tumour location probability maps. Materials and Methods: MRI FLAIR sequences of 214 patients (110 male, mean age of 8.54 years, 143 BRAF fused and 71 BRAF V600E mutated pLGG tumours) from January 2000 to December 2018 were included in this retrospective REB-approved study. Tumour segmentations (volumes of interest—VOIs) were provided by a pediatric neuroradiology fellow and verified by a pediatric neuroradiologist. Patients were randomly split into development and test sets with an 80/20 ratio. The 3D binary VOI masks for each class in the development set were combined to derive the probability density functions of tumour location. Three pipelines for molecular diagnosis of pLGG were developed: location-based, CNN-based, and hybrid. The experiment was repeated 100 times each with different model initializations and data splits, and the Areas Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUROC) was calculated, and Student’s t -test was conducted. Results: The location-based classifier achieved an AUROC of 77.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) (76.8, 79.0). CNN-based classifiers achieved an AUROC of 86.1, 95% CI (85.0, 87.3), while the tumour-location-guided CNNs outperformed the other classifiers with an average AUROC of 88.64, 95% CI (87.6, 89.7), which was statistically significant ( P -value .0018). Conclusion: Incorporating tumour location probability maps into CNN models led to significant improvements for molecular subtype identification of pLGG.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".