ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2021
Machine learning-based differentiation between multiple sclerosis and glioma WHO II°-IV° using O-(2-[18F] fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine positron emission tomography.
Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep Learning MRI Models for the Differential Diagnosis of Tumefactive Demyelination versusAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025Article
- [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- Article
- Review
- Deep learning identified glioblastoma subtypes based on internal genomic expression ranks.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence Based on Medical Imaging in Glioma: Current State and Future Challenges.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- Feasibility on the Use of Radiomics Features of 11[C]-MET PET/CT in Central Nervous System Tumours: Preliminary Results on Potential Grading Discrimination Using a Machine Learning Model.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Article
- Artificial intelligence in neuro-oncology: Current advances and legal considerations in the European Union.Neuro-oncology advancesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to test the diagnostic significance of FET-PET imaging combined with machine learning for the differentiation between multiple sclerosis (MS) and glioma II°-IV°.
methodsOur database was screened for patients in whom FET-PET imaging was performed for the diagnostic workup of newly diagnosed lesions evident on MRI and suggestive of glioma. Among those, we identified patients with histologically confirmed glioma II°-IV°, and those who later turned out to have MS. For each group, tumor-to-brain ratio (TBR) derived features of FET were determined. A support vector machine (SVM) based machine learning algorithm was constructed to enhance classification ability, and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis with area under the curve (AUC) metric served to ascertain model performance.
resultsA total of 41 patients met selection criteria, including seven patients with MS and 34 patients with glioma. TBR values were significantly higher in the glioma group (TBRmax glioma vs. MS: p = 0.002; TBRmean glioma vs. MS: p = 0.014). In a subgroup analysis, TBR values significantly differentiated between MS and glioblastoma (TBRmax glioblastoma vs. MS: p = 0.0003, TBRmean glioblastoma vs. MS: p = 0.0003) and between MS and oligodendroglioma (ODG) (TBRmax ODG vs. MS: p = 0.003; TBRmean ODG vs. MS: p = 0.01). The ability to differentiate between MS and glioma II°-IV° increased from 0.79 using standard TBR analysis to 0.94 using a SVM based machine learning algorithm.
conclusionsFET-PET imaging may help differentiate MS from glioma II°-IV° and SVM based machine learning approaches can enhance classification performance.
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.