Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38291266›Full record

SynthesisJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2024

AI-driven estimation of O6 methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation in glioblastoma patients: a systematic review with bias analysis.

Mullapudi Venkata Sai Samartha, Navneet Kumar Dubey, Biswajit Jena, Gorantla Maheswar, Wen-Cheng Lo, Sanjay Saxena

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Mullapudi Venkata Sai Samartha *Department of Computer Science & Engineering, International Institute of Information Technology, Bhubaneswar, 751003, India.
Navneet Kumar Dubey *Victory Biotechnology Co., Ltd., Taipei, 114757, Taiwan.
Biswajit Jena *Institute of Technical Education and Research, SOA Deemed to be University, Bhubaneswar, 751030, India.
Gorantla Maheswar *Department of Computer Science & Engineering, International Institute of Information Technology, Bhubaneswar, 751003, India.
Wen-Cheng LoDivision of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, 11031, Taiwan. drlons@h.tmu.edu.tw.
Sanjay SaxenaDepartment of Computer Science & Engineering, International Institute of Information Technology, Bhubaneswar, 751003, India. sanjay@iiit-bh.ac.in.
International Institute of Information Technology · INIndian Institute of Management Lucknow · INSiksha O Anusandhan University · INTaipei Medical University · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate and non-invasive estimation of MGMT promoter methylation status in glioblastoma (GBM) patients is of paramount clinical importance, as it is a predictive biomarker associated with improved overall survival (OS). In response to the clinical need, recent studies have focused on the development of non-invasive artificial intelligence (AI)-based methods for MGMT estimation. In this systematic review, we not only delve into the technical aspects of these AI-driven MGMT estimation methods but also emphasize their profound clinical implications. Specifically, we explore the potential impact of accurate non-invasive MGMT estimation on GBM patient care and treatment decisions.

methodsEmploying a PRISMA search strategy, we identified 33 relevant studies from reputable databases, including PubMed, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and IEEE Explore. These studies were comprehensively assessed using 21 diverse attributes, encompassing factors such as types of imaging modalities, machine learning (ML) methods, and cohort sizes, with clear rationales for attribute scoring. Subsequently, we ranked these studies and established a cutoff value to categorize them into low-bias and high-bias groups.

resultsBy analyzing the 'cumulative plot of mean score' and the 'frequency plot curve' of the studies, we determined a cutoff value of 6.00. A higher mean score indicated a lower risk of bias, with studies scoring above the cutoff mark categorized as low-bias (73%), while 27% fell into the high-bias category.

conclusionOur findings underscore the immense potential of AI-based machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) methods in non-invasively determining MGMT promoter methylation status. Importantly, the clinical significance of these AI-driven advancements lies in their capacity to transform GBM patient care by providing accurate and timely information for treatment decisions. However, the translation of these technical advancements into clinical practice presents challenges, including the need for large multi-institutional cohorts and the integration of diverse data types. Addressing these challenges will be critical in realizing the full potential of AI in improving the reliability and accessibility of MGMT estimation while lowering the risk of bias in clinical decision-making.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsGlioblastomaArtificial IntelligenceDNADNA MethylationDNA Modification MethylasesDNA Repair EnzymesHumansReproducibility of ResultsTumor Suppressor ProteinsDNADNA Modification MethylasesDNA Repair EnzymesMGMT protein, humanTumor Suppressor ProteinsArtificial intelligence (AI)Deep learningMachine learningMethylation statusO(6)-methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT)Radiogenomics

Identifiers

PMID38291266
PMCPMC10827977
OpenAlexW4391396304

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.