MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416402674 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2025.1664458

Prognostic and predictive determinants in high-grade gliomas: integrating tumor-intrinsic biology with patient and system-level factors

2025· article· en· W4416402674 on OpenAlexaff
William Davalan, Ryan Alkins

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOligodendrogliomaMechanism (biology)RadiogenomicsGlioblastomaPrecision medicinePersonalized medicineAstrocytomaNarrative review

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adult-type high-grade gliomas (HGGs) represent a biologically heterogeneous and clinically aggressive class of primary central nervous system tumors, characterized by diffuse infiltration, therapeutic resistance, and poor prognosis. Contemporary advances in molecular neuro-oncology have redefined prognostic stratification, shifting from purely histopathological frameworks to integrated molecular classification. This narrative review critically examines the intrinsic biological determinants of prognosis in HGGs, as delineated in the 2021 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System, which differentiates glioblastoma (IDH-wildtype), astrocytoma (IDH-mutant), and oligodendroglioma (IDH-mutant, 1p/19q-codeleted) based on distinct molecular signatures. We examine the prognostic and therapeutic relevance of canonical biomarkers, alongside emerging molecular alterations and autophagy-related gene expression. In addition, we explore the tumor microenvironment and immune landscape of HGGs, and highlight the growing role of radiogenomics and artificial intelligence in integrating imaging with multi-omics data for personalized risk stratification. Beyond tumor-intrinsic biology, increasing attention is being directed toward patient-level and system-level determinants that shape prognosis. This review also synthesizes current evidence on the impact of demographic, clinical, therapeutic, and socio-economic factors influencing survival in patients with HGGs. A multidimensional approach to prognostication that integrates molecular, clinical, and contextual data is therefore essential for both improving survival and advancing health equity. By synthesizing established and emerging prognostic insights, this review underscores the critical role of tumor-intrinsic biology in guiding precision oncology approaches and developing biologically informed prognostic frameworks for patients with HGGs, while supporting the integration of non-biological determinants into clinical frameworks.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207