ArticleCancer2020
Histopathology-validated machine learning radiographic biomarker for noninvasive discrimination between true progression and pseudo-progression in glioblastoma.
Article in Cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
69 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence algorithms for differentiating pseudoprogression from true progression in high-grade gliomas: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- Radiomics for differentiating radiation-induced brain injury from recurrence in gliomas: systematic review, meta-analysis, and methodological quality evaluation using METRICS and RQS.European radiology · 2025Pooled it
- Machine learning imaging applications in the differentiation of true tumour progression from treatment-related effects in brain tumours: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Imaging Biomarkers of Glioblastoma Treatment Response: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Recent Machine Learning Studies.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Quantitative, longitudinal measurements of response to immunotherapy for glioblastoma using multiparametric MRI in a long-term survivor treated with autologous tumor lysate-loaded dendritic cell vaccine: an illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2026Article
- Multimodal imaging and AI in brain tumor surgery: current tools and emerging integration.npj biomedical innovations · 2026Review
- Spatially identifying regions of tumor recurrence in patients with suspected recurrent glioma using physiologic MRI and machine learning.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Microstructural MRI combined with metabolic MRI to evaluate the progression-free survival of patients with glioblastoma at the early follow-up after tumor treating fields: a pilot study.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Machine Learning-Driven Metabolomic Biomarker Discovery in Glioblastoma: Advances, Challenges, and Future Directions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Head-to-head comparison of diffusion imaging markers for cognitive decline and risk of dementia: The population-based Rotterdam Study.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- AI-driven radiomics and radiogenomics: supporting the assessment and differentiation of pseudoprogression in cellular immunotherapy for glioblastoma.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Timepoint-Specific Benchmarking of Deep Learning Models for Glioblastoma Follow-Up MRI.Cancers · 2025Article
- AI-Driven Innovations in Neuroradiology and Neurosurgery: Scoping Review of Current Evidence and Future Directions.Cancers · 2025Review
- Machine learning and deep learning in glioblastoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- ECP-GAN: Generating Endometrial Cancer Pathology Images and Segmentation Labels via Two-Stage Generative Adversarial Networks.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- A self-supervised multimodal deep learning approach to differentiate post-radiotherapy progression from pseudoprogression in glioblastoma.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Laryngovibrogram as a normalized spatiotemporal representation of vocal fold dynamics.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence for response prediction and personalisation in radiation oncology.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025Review
- Response Assessment in Long-Term Glioblastoma Survivors Using a Multiparametric MRI-Based Prediction Model.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Response Assessment in Neuro Oncology (AI-RANO), part 2: recommendations for standardisation, validation, and good clinical practice.The Lancet. Oncology · 2024Review
9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundImaging of glioblastoma patients after maximal safe resection and chemoradiation commonly demonstrates new enhancements that raise concerns about tumor progression. However, in 30% to 50% of patients, these enhancements primarily represent the effects of treatment, or pseudo-progression (PsP). We hypothesize that quantitative machine learning analysis of clinically acquired multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) can identify subvisual imaging characteristics to provide robust, noninvasive imaging signatures that can distinguish true progression (TP) from PsP.
methodsWe evaluated independent discovery (n = 40) and replication (n = 23) cohorts of glioblastoma patients who underwent second resection due to progressive radiographic changes suspicious for recurrence. Deep learning and conventional feature extraction methods were used to extract quantitative characteristics from the mpMRI scans. Multivariate analysis of these features revealed radiophenotypic signatures distinguishing among TP, PsP, and mixed response that compared with similar categories blindly defined by board-certified neuropathologists. Additionally, interinstitutional validation was performed on 20 new patients.
resultsPatients who demonstrate TP on neuropathology are significantly different (P < .0001) from those with PsP, showing imaging features reflecting higher angiogenesis, higher cellularity, and lower water concentration. The accuracy of the proposed signature in leave-one-out cross-validation was 87% for predicting PsP (area under the curve [AUC], 0.92) and 84% for predicting TP (AUC, 0.83), whereas in the discovery/replication cohort, the accuracy was 87% for predicting PsP (AUC, 0.84) and 78% for TP (AUC, 0.80). The accuracy in the interinstitutional cohort was 75% (AUC, 0.80).
conclusionQuantitative mpMRI analysis via machine learning reveals distinctive noninvasive signatures of TP versus PsP after treatment of glioblastoma. Integration of the proposed method into clinical studies can be performed using the freely available Cancer Imaging Phenomics Toolkit.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.