Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31594994›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Radiomics and MGMT promoter methylation for prognostication of newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

Takahiro Sasaki, Manabu Kinoshita, Koji Fujita, Junya Fukai, Nobuhide Hayashi, Yuji Uematsu, Yoshiko Okita, Masahiro Nonaka, Shusuke Moriuchi, Takehiro Uda and 13 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Image-based Re-evaluation of the JCOG0911 Study Focusing on Tumor Volume and Survival, Disease Progression Diagnosis, and Radiomic Prognostication for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2025
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

23 authors at 12 institutions in 1 country.

Takahiro SasakiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Wakayama Rosai Hospital, Wakayama, 640-8505, Japan.
Manabu KinoshitaKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan. mail@manabukinoshita.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7923-6902
Koji FujitaKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Junya FukaiKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7103-8493
Nobuhide HayashiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Wakayama Rosai Hospital, Wakayama, 640-8505, Japan.
Yuji UematsuKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Yoshiko OkitaKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Masahiro NonakaKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Shusuke MoriuchiKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Takehiro UdaKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Naohiro TsuyuguchiKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Hideyuki AritaKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Kanji MoriKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Kenichi IshibashiKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Koji TakanoKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Namiko NishidaKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Tomoko ShofudaKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Ema YoshiokaKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Daisuke KanematsuKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Yoshinori KodamaKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Masayuki ManoKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Naoyuki NakaoKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Yonehiro KanemuraKansai Molecular Diagnosis Network for CNS Tumors, Osaka, 540-0006, Japan.
Osaka National Hospital · JPWakayama Medical University · JPOsaka City University · JPKansai Medical University · JPKansai Rosai Hospital · JPKitano Hospital · JPKobe University · JPOsaka City General Hospital · JPOsaka Gakuin University · JPThe University of Osaka · JPToyonaka Municipal Hospital · JPWakayama Rosai Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We attempted to establish a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based radiomic model for stratifying prognostic subgroups of newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) patients and predicting O (6)-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase promotor methylation (pMGMT-met) status of the tumor. Preoperative MRI scans from 201 newly diagnosed GBM patients were included in this study. A total of 489 texture features including the first-order feature, second-order features from 162 datasets, and location data from 182 datasets were collected. Supervised principal component analysis was used for prognostication and predictive modeling for pMGMT-met status was performed based on least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression. 22 radiomic features that were correlated with prognosis were used to successfully stratify patients into high-risk and low-risk groups (p = 0.004, Log-rank test). The radiomic high- and low-risk stratification and pMGMT status were independent prognostic factors. As a matter of fact, predictive accuracy of the pMGMT methylation status was 67% when modeled by two significant radiomic features. A significant survival difference was observed among the combined high-risk group, combined intermediate-risk group (this group consists of radiomic low risk and pMGMT-unmet or radiomic high risk and pMGMT-met), and combined low-risk group (p = 0.0003, Log-rank test). Radiomics can be used to build a prognostic score for stratifying high- and low-risk GBM, which was an independent prognostic factor from pMGMT methylation status. On the other hand, predictive accuracy of the pMGMT methylation status by radiomic analysis was insufficient for practical use.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationPromoter Regions, GeneticBrain NeoplasmsCohort StudiesDNA Modification MethylasesDNA Repair EnzymesGlioblastomaHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingPrognosisRadiometryTumor Suppressor ProteinsDNA Modification MethylasesDNA Repair EnzymesMGMT protein, humanTumor Suppressor Proteins

Identifiers

PMID31594994
PMCPMC6783410
OpenAlexW2979673604

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.