Development and validation of a molecular classifier of meningiomas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Meningiomas exhibit considerable clinical and biological heterogeneity. We previously identified 4 distinct molecular groups (immunogenic, NF2-wildtype, hypermetabolic, and proliferative) that address much of this heterogeneity. Despite the utility of these groups, the stochasticity of clustering methods and the use of multi-omics data for discovery limits the potential for classifying prospective cases. We sought to address this with a dedicated classifier. METHODS: Using an international cohort of 1698 meningiomas, we constructed and rigorously validated a machine learning-based molecular classifier using only DNA methylation data as input. Original and newly predicted molecular groups were compared using DNA methylation, RNA sequencing, copy number profiles, whole-exome sequencing, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: We show that group-specific outcomes in the validation cohort are nearly identical to those originally described, with median progression-free survival (PFS) of 7.4 (4.9-Inf) years in hypermetabolic tumors and 2.5 (2.3-5.3) years in proliferative tumors (not reached in the other groups). Tumors classified as NF2-wildtype had no NF2 mutations, and 51.4% had canonical mutations previously described in this group. RNA pathway analysis revealed upregulation of immune-related pathways in the immunogenic group, metabolic pathways in the hypermetabolic group, and cell cycle programs in the proliferative group. Bulk deconvolution similarly revealed the enrichment of macrophages in immunogenic tumors and neoplastic cells in hypermetabolic and proliferative tumors with similar proportions to those originally described. CONCLUSIONS: Our DNA methylation-based classifier, which is publicly available for immediate clinical use, recapitulates the biology and outcomes of the original molecular groups as assessed using multiple metrics/platforms that were not used in its training.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
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".