Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31371027›Full record

ReviewClinical radiology2020

Machine learning and glioma imaging biomarkers.

T C Booth, M Williams, A Luis, J Cardoso, K Ashkan, H Shuaib

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

54 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Morphological MRI features as prognostic indicators in brain metastases.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2024
    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

6 authors.

T C BoothSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London SE1 7EH, UK; Department of Neuroradiology, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London SE5 9RS, UK. Electronic address: thomascalvertbooth@gmail.com.
M WilliamsDepartment of Neuro-oncology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Fulham Palace Rd, London W6 8RF, UK.
A LuisSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London SE1 7EH, UK; Department of Radiology, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Blackshaw Road, London SW17 0QT, UK.
J CardosoSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London SE1 7EH, UK.
K AshkanDepartment of Neurosurgery, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London SE5 9RS, UK.
H ShuaibDepartment of Medical Physics, Guy's & St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London SE1 7EH, UK; Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, SE5 8AF, UK.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 203148Wellcome Trust 203148/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo review how machine learning (ML) is applied to imaging biomarkers in neuro-oncology, in particular for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment response monitoring. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe PubMed and MEDLINE databases were searched for articles published before September 2018 using relevant search terms. The search strategy focused on articles applying ML to high-grade glioma biomarkers for treatment response monitoring, prognosis, and prediction.

resultsMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is typically used throughout the patient pathway because routine structural imaging provides detailed anatomical and pathological information and advanced techniques provide additional physiological detail. Using carefully chosen image features, ML is frequently used to allow accurate classification in a variety of scenarios. Rather than being chosen by human selection, ML also enables image features to be identified by an algorithm. Much research is applied to determining molecular profiles, histological tumour grade, and prognosis using MRI images acquired at the time that patients first present with a brain tumour. Differentiating a treatment response from a post-treatment-related effect using imaging is clinically important and also an area of active study (described here in one of two Special Issue publications dedicated to the application of ML in glioma imaging).

conclusionAlthough pioneering, most of the evidence is of a low level, having been obtained retrospectively and in single centres. Studies applying ML to build neuro-oncology monitoring biomarker models have yet to show an overall advantage over those using traditional statistical methods. Development and validation of ML models applied to neuro-oncology require large, well-annotated datasets, and therefore multidisciplinary and multi-centre collaborations are necessary.

Indexed as

BiomarkersMachine LearningBrain NeoplasmsGliomaHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeoplasm GradingPrognosisBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID31371027
PMCPMC6927796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.