Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37058375›Full record

ArticleIEEE transactions on medical imaging2023

Bayesian Inference of Tissue Heterogeneity for Individualized Prediction of Glioma Growth.

Baoshan Liang, Jingye Tan, Luke Lozenski, David A Hormuth, Thomas E Yankeelov, Umberto Villa, Danial Faghihi

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in IEEE transactions on medical imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Dynamic image-informed selection of biomechanical tumor growth models.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Identifiability and model selection frameworks for models of high-grade glioma response to chemoradiation.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Baoshan Liang
Jingye Tan
Luke Lozenski
David A Hormuth
Thomas E Yankeelov
Umberto Villa
Danial Faghihi
University at Buffalo, State University of New York · USLivestrong Foundation · USThe University of Texas at Austin · USWashington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

Imaging-based tumor forecasting to predict brain tumor progression and response to therapyR01CA260003 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI QUARLES, CHRISTOPHER CHAD, YANKEELOV, THOMAS E · 2022 to 2025
$3.2M
Clinical Development of Rhenium Nanoliposomes (RNL186) for GlioblastomaR01CA235800 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI BRENNER, ANDREW JACOB · 2019 to 2023
$3.0M
Image Driven Multi-Scale Modeling to Predict Treatment Response in Breast CancerU01CA174706 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI QUARANTA, VITO, YANKEELOV, THOMAS E · 2013 to 2018
$2.5M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA235800NCI NIH HHS R01 CA260003NCI NIH HHS U01 CA174706
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reliably predicting the future spread of brain tumors using imaging data and on a subject-specific basis requires quantifying uncertainties in data, biophysical models of tumor growth, and spatial heterogeneity of tumor and host tissue. This work introduces a Bayesian framework to calibrate the two-/three-dimensional spatial distribution of the parameters within a tumor growth model to quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data and demonstrates its implementation in a pre-clinical model of glioma. The framework leverages an atlas-based brain segmentation of grey and white matter to establish subject-specific priors and tunable spatial dependencies of the model parameters in each region. Using this framework, the tumor-specific parameters are calibrated from quantitative MRI measurements early in the course of tumor development in four rats and used to predict the spatial development of the tumor at later times. The results suggest that the tumor model, calibrated by animal-specific imaging data at one time point, can accurately predict tumor shapes with a Dice coefficient 0.89. However, the reliability of the predicted volume and shape of tumors strongly relies on the number of earlier imaging time points used for calibrating the model. This study demonstrates, for the first time, the ability to determine the uncertainty in the inferred tissue heterogeneity and the model-predicted tumor shape.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsGliomaAnimalsBayes TheoremMagnetic Resonance ImagingRatsReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID37058375
PMCPMC10599765
OpenAlexW4365479631

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.