ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021
Machine Learning-Based Analysis of Magnetic Resonance Radiomics for the Classification of Gliosarcoma and Glioblastoma.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnosis of Acute Versus Chronic Thoracolumbar Vertebral Compression Fractures Using CT Radiomics Based on Machine Learning: a Preliminary Study.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2025Article
- A Review of Artificial Intelligence-Based Systems for Non-Invasive Glioblastoma Diagnosis.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- MRI-based radiomics model for differentiating focal cortical dysplasia from dysembryoplastic neuroepithelial tumor in epileptic children.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Optimizing radiomics for prostate cancer diagnosis: feature selection strategies, machine learning classifiers, and MRI sequences.Insights into imaging · 2024Article
- Article
- Differentiating Gliosarcoma from Glioblastoma: A Novel Approach Using PEACE and XGBoost to Deal with Datasets with Ultra-High Dimensional Confounders.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Preoperative prediction of MGMT promoter methylation in glioblastoma based on multiregional and multi-sequence MRI radiomics analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Primary Intracranial Gliosarcoma: Is It Really a Variant of Glioblastoma? An Update of the Clinical, Radiological, and Biomolecular Characteristics.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- One Step Forward-The Current Role of Artificial Intelligence in Glioblastoma Imaging.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Article
- Review
- Radiomics for pseudoprogression prediction in high grade gliomas: added value of MR contrast agent.Heliyon · 2022Article
- Comparison of ischemic stroke diagnosis models based on machine learning.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- Computed Tomography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Pathological Features of Gliosarcoma.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo identify optimal machine-learning methods for the radiomics-based differentiation of gliosarcoma (GSM) from glioblastoma (GBM). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study analyzed cerebral magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data of 83 patients with pathologically diagnosed GSM (58 men, 25 women; mean age, 50.5 ± 12.9 years; range, 16-77 years) and 100 patients with GBM (58 men, 42 women; mean age, 53.4 ± 14.1 years; range, 12-77 years) and divided them into a training and validation set randomly. Radiomics features were extracted from the tumor mass and peritumoral edema. Three feature selection and classification methods were evaluated in terms of their performance in distinguishing GSM and GBM: the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), Relief, and Random Forest (RF); and adaboost classifier (Ada), support vector machine (SVM), and RF; respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and accuracy (ACC) of each method were analyzed.
resultsBased on tumor mass features, the selection method LASSO + classifier SVM was found to feature the highest AUC (0.85) and ACC (0.77) in the validation set, followed by Relief + RF (AUC = 0.84, ACC = 0.72) and LASSO + RF (AUC = 0.82, ACC = 0.75). Based on peritumoral edema features, Relief + SVM was found to have the highest AUC (0.78) and ACC (0.73) in the validation set. Regardless of the method, tumor mass features significantly outperformed peritumoral edema features in the differentiation of GSM from GBM (
conclusionOur radiomics study identified the selection method LASSO combined with the classifier SVM as the optimal method for differentiating GSM from GBM based on tumor mass features.
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.