F.1 Validation and next-generation update of a DNA methylation-based recurrence predictor for meningioma: a multicenter prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: We previously developed a DNA methylation-based risk predictor for meningioma, which has been used locally in a prospective fashion. As a follow-up, we validate this model using a large prospective cohort and introduce a streamlined next-generation model compatible with newer methylation arrays. Methods: The performance of our next-generation predictor was compared with our original model and standard-of-care 2021 WHO grade using time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves. A nomogram was generated by incorporating our methylation predictor with WHO grade and extent of resection. Results: A total of 1347 meningioma cases were utilized in the study, including 469 prospective cases from 3 institutions and a retrospective cohort of 100 WHO grade 2 cases for model validation. Both the original and next-generation models significantly outperformed 2021 WHO grade in predicting postoperative recurrence. Dichotomizing into grade-specific risk subgroups was predictive of outcome within both WHO grades 1 and 2 tumours (log-rank p<0.05). Multivariable Cox regression demonstrated benefit of adjuvant radiotherapy in high-risk cases specifically, reinforcing its informative role in clinical decision making. Conclusions: This next-generation DNA methylation-based meningioma outcome predictor significantly outperforms 2021 WHO grading in predicting time to recurrence. This will help improve prognostication and inform patient selection for RT.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".