Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28385884›Full record

ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2017

Classification of High-Grade Glioma into Tumor and Nontumor Components Using Support Vector Machine.

D T Blumenthal, M Artzi, G Liberman, F Bokstein, O Aizenstein, D Ben Bashat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Molecular Biology in Treatment Decision Processes-Neuro-Oncology Edition.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Repeatability of dynamic contrast enhanced vJournal of neuro-oncology · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

D T BlumenthalFrom the Neuro-Oncology Service (D.T.B., F.B.).ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8868-0148
M ArtziFunctional Brain Center (M.A., O.A., D.B.B.), Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4214-1875
G LibermanDepartment of Chemical Physics (G.L.), Weizmann Institute, Tel Aviv, Israel.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2325-1879
F BoksteinFrom the Neuro-Oncology Service (D.T.B., F.B.).
O AizensteinFunctional Brain Center (M.A., O.A., D.B.B.), Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3422-0901
D Ben BashatFunctional Brain Center (M.A., O.A., D.B.B.), Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel dafnab@tlvmc.gov.il.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8396-1031

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeCurrent imaging assessment of high-grade brain tumors relies on the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria, which measure gross volume of enhancing and nonenhancing lesions from conventional MRI sequences. These assessments may fail to reliably distinguish tumor and nontumor. This study aimed to classify enhancing and nonenhancing lesion areas into tumor-versus-nontumor components. MATERIALS AND

methodsA total of 140 MRI scans obtained from 32 patients with high-grade gliomas and 6 patients with brain metastases were included. Classification of lesion areas was performed using a support vector machine classifier trained on 4 components: enhancing and nonenhancing, tumor and nontumor, based on T1-weighted, FLAIR, and dynamic-contrast-enhancing MRI parameters. Classification results were evaluated by 2-fold cross-validation analysis of the training set and MR spectroscopy. Longitudinal changes of the component volumes were compared with Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria.

resultsNormalized T1-weighted values, FLAIR, plasma volume, volume transfer constant, and bolus-arrival-time parameters differentiated components. High sensitivity and specificity (100%) were obtained within the enhancing and nonenhancing areas. Longitudinal changes in component volumes correlated with the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria in 27 patients; 5 patients (16%) demonstrated an increase in tumor component volumes indicating tumor progression. These changes preceded Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology assessments by several months. Seven patients treated with bevacizumab showed a shift to an infiltrative pattern of progression.

conclusionsThis study proposes an automatic classification method: segmented Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria based on advanced imaging that reliably differentiates tumor and nontumor components in high-grade gliomas. The segmented Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria may improve therapy-response assessment and provide earlier indication of progression.

Indexed as

Support Vector MachineAdultBrain NeoplasmsFemaleGliomaHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMagnetic Resonance SpectroscopyMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID28385884
PMCPMC7960385

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.