A Radiomic Model for Gliomas Grade and Patient Survival Prediction
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain tumors are among the most common malignant tumors of the central nervous system, with high mortality and recurrence rates. Radiomics extracts quantitative features from medical images, converting them into predictive biomarkers for tumor diagnosis, prognosis, and survival analysis. Despite the invasiveness and heterogeneity of brain tumors, even with timely treatment, the overall survival time or survival probability is not necessarily favorable. Therefore, accurate prediction of brain tumor grade and survival outcomes is important for personalized treatment. In this study, we propose a radiomic model for the non-invasive prediction of brain tumor grade and patient survival outcomes. We used four magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences from 159 patients with glioma. Four classifiers were employed based on whether feature selection was applied. The features were derived from regions of interest identified and corrected either manually or automatically. The extreme gradient boosting (XGB) model with 3860 radiomic features achieved the highest classification performance, with an AUC of 98.20%, in distinguishing LGG from GBM images using manually corrected labels. Similarly, the Random Forest (RF) model exhibits the best discrimination between short-term and long-term survival groups with a p-value < 0.0003, a hazard ratio (HR) value of 3.24, and a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 1.63–4.43 based on the ICC features. The experimental findings demonstrate strong classification accuracy and effectively predict survival outcomes in glioma patients.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it