Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30657997›Full record

Trial reportNeuro-oncology2019

Guiding the first biopsy in glioma patients using estimated Ki-67 maps derived from MRI: conventional versus advanced imaging.

Evan D H Gates, Jonathan S Lin, Jeffrey S Weinberg, Jackson Hamilton, Sujit S Prabhu, John D Hazle, Gregory N Fuller, Veera Baladandayuthapani, David Fuentes, Dawid Schellingerhout

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Neuro-oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
–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

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Imaging-Based Algorithm for the Local Grading of Glioma.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2020
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Theranostics · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

10 authors.

Evan D H GatesDepartment of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (UT MDACC), Houston, Texas.
Jonathan S LinDepartment of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (UT MDACC), Houston, Texas.
Jeffrey S WeinbergDepartment of Neurosurgery, UT MDACC, Houston, Texas.
Jackson HamiltonDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, UT MDACC, Houston, Texas.
Sujit S PrabhuDepartment of Neurosurgery, UT MDACC, Houston, Texas.
John D HazleDepartment of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (UT MDACC), Houston, Texas.
Gregory N FullerDepartment of Pathology, UT MDACC, Houston, Texas.
Veera BaladandayuthapaniDepartment of Biostatistics, UT MDACC, Houston, Texas.
David FuentesDepartment of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (UT MDACC), Houston, Texas.
Dawid SchellingerhoutDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, UT MDACC, Houston, Texas.

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Fabien Delerue · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
Graph-based Bayesian analysis of Genomics and Proteomics DataR01CA194391 · NCI · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI BALADANDAYUTHAPANI, VEERABHADRAN, MALLICK, BANI K · 2016 to 2020
$2.0M
Integrative methods for high-dimensional genomics dataR01CA160736 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI BALADANDAYUTHAPANI, VEERABHADRAN · 2011 to 2014
$1.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NCI NIH HHS R01 CA160736NCI NIH HHS R01 CA194391
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUndersampling of gliomas at first biopsy is a major clinical problem, as accurate grading determines all subsequent treatment. We submit a technological solution to reduce the problem of undersampling by estimating a marker of tumor proliferation (Ki-67) using MR imaging data as inputs, against a stereotactic histopathology gold standard.

methodsMR imaging was performed with anatomic, diffusion, permeability, and perfusion sequences, in untreated glioma patients in a prospective clinical trial. Stereotactic biopsies were harvested from each patient immediately prior to surgical resection. For each biopsy, an imaging description (23 parameters) was developed, and the Ki-67 index was recorded. Machine learning models were built to estimate Ki-67 from imaging inputs, and cross validation was undertaken to determine the error in estimates. The best model was used to generate graphical maps of Ki-67 estimates across the whole brain.

resultsFifty-two image-guided biopsies were collected from 23 evaluable patients. The random forest algorithm best modeled Ki-67 with 4 imaging inputs (T2-weighted, fractional anisotropy, cerebral blood flow, Ktrans). It predicted the Ki-67 expression levels with a root mean square (RMS) error of 3.5% (R2 = 0.75). A less accurate predictive result (RMS error 5.4%, R2 = 0.50) was found using conventional imaging only.

conclusionKi-67 can be predicted to clinically useful accuracies using clinical imaging data. Advanced imaging (diffusion, perfusion, and permeability) improves predictive accuracy over conventional imaging alone. Ki-67 predictions, displayed as graphical maps, could be used to guide biopsy, resection, and/or radiation in the care of glioma patients.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorBrain NeoplasmsFemaleGliomaHumansImage-Guided BiopsyImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedKi-67 AntigenMachine LearningMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNeuroimagingBiomarkers, TumorKi-67 Antigengliomamachine learningmagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID30657997
PMCPMC6422438

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.