Data-driven probabilistic mapping of the spatial and molecular landscape of glioma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the spatial distribution of gliomas in the brain and their molecular subtypes can aid in the diagnosis and development of targeted therapies. This study aims to create probabilistic radiologic maps of glioma locations using large MRI datasets and the most recent consensus brain tumour classification. Neuroimaging data from multiple databases were analysed. Patients included had MRI T1 images and validated tumour segmentations. Probabilistic tumour maps were generated whereby binary tumour masks were aligned to a standard brain template and aggregated to compute voxel-wise frequency maps of glioma occurrence detailing glioma volume, molecular subtype, age, sex and overall survival with tumour location. The study included 2164 patients with gliomas. Key findings include distinct spatial patterns associated with glioma size and molecular subtype: smaller tumours favoured the left temporal region, medium-sized tumours the medial frontoparietal and bilateral temporal regions and larger tumours the frontotemporoparietal regions, predominantly on the right. Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-wild-type tumours were more common in medial parietotemporal regions, while IDH-mutant tumours were preferentially found in frontotemporal regions. Younger patients had more frontal tumours, while older patients had higher parieto-occipital tumour burdens. Tumours in medial structures and parietal lobes were linked to lower survival, whereas right temporal tumours were associated with higher rates of survival. These findings likely correlate with IDH mutation status. Leveraging eight glioma databases, probabilistic tumour maps revealed significant relationships between brain regions, molecular subtypes and clinical outcomes. These findings could be used in clinical decision-making and offer insights into glioma pathogenesis and treatment of patients impacted by this disease.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".