Quantitative Physiologic MRI Combined with Feature Engineering for Developing Machine Learning-Based Prediction Models to Distinguish Glioblastomas from Single Brain Metastases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The accurate and early distinction of glioblastomas (GBMs) from single brain metastases (BMs) provides a window of opportunity for reframing treatment strategies enabling optimal and timely therapeutic interventions. We sought to leverage physiologically sensitive parameters derived from diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC)–perfusion-weighted imaging (PWI) along with machine learning-based methods to distinguish GBMs from single BMs. Methods: Patients with histopathology-confirmed GBMs (n = 62) and BMs (n = 26) and exhibiting contrast-enhancing regions (CERs) underwent 3T anatomical imaging, DTI and DSC-PWI prior to treatment. Median values of mean diffusivity (MD), fractional anisotropy, linear, planar and spheric anisotropic coefficients, and relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) and maximum rCBV values were measured from CERs and immediate peritumor regions. Data normalization and scaling were performed. In the next step, most relevant features were extracted (non-interacting features), which were subsequently used to generate a set of new, innovative, high-order features (interacting features) using a feature engineering method. Finally, 10 machine learning classifiers were employed in distinguishing GBMs and BMs. Cross-validation and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were performed to determine the diagnostic performance. Results: A random forest classifier with ANOVA F-value feature selection algorithm using both interacting and non-interacting features provided the best diagnostic performance in distinguishing GBMs from BMs with an area under the ROC curve of 92.67%, a classification accuracy of 87.8%, a sensitivity of 73.64% and a specificity of 97.5%. Conclusions: A machine learning based approach involving the combined use of interacting and non-interacting physiological MRI parameters shows promise to differentiate between GBMs and BMs with high accuracy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".