ArticleAnnals of neurology2024
Multiparametric Characterization of Focal Cortical Dysplasia Using 3D MR Fingerprinting.
Article in Annals of neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of volume- and surface-based magnetic resonance imaging morphometry algorithms in the detection of focal cortical dysplasia.Epilepsia · 2026Article
- Enhancing Study Design and Analysis of MR Imaging Markers Through Measurement Error Modeling.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2026Article
- Neuroanatomical correlates of neuropsychological dysfunction in pediatric pharmacoresistant epilepsy due to focal cortical dysplasia type II.Epilepsia open · 2026Article
- Clinical use and radiological yield of magnetic resonance fingerprinting in epilepsy.Epilepsia · 2026Article
- AI in epilepsy neuroimaging.Current opinion in neurology · 2026Review
- The epileptologist's perspective of focal cortical dysplasia type 3: From concept to management.Epilepsia · 2026Review
- Surfaced-based detection of focal cortical dysplasia using magnetic resonance fingerprinting and machine learning.Epilepsia · 2026Article
- Analysis of cortical dysplasias using b-tensor encoding diffusion MRI in an animal model.PloS one · 2026Article
- Mirrored structural symmetry index (VMSSI): a novel approach for diagnosing MR-negative focal cortical dysplasia using structural MRI.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Utility of MR fingerprinting in differentiating epileptogenic from non-epileptogenic cortical malformations.Journal of the neurological sciences · 2025Article
- ILAE neuroimaging task force highlight: MRI detection of early life epilepsy caused by focal cortical dysplasia.Epileptic disorders : international epilepsy journal with videotape · 2025Article
- Automated Whole-Brain Focal Cortical Dysplasia Detection Using MR Fingerprinting With Deep Learning.Neurology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo develop a multiparametric machine-learning (ML) framework using high-resolution 3 dimensional (3D) magnetic resonance (MR) fingerprinting (MRF) data for quantitative characterization of focal cortical dysplasia (FCD). MATERIALS: We included 119 subjects, 33 patients with focal epilepsy and histopathologically confirmed FCD, 60 age- and gender-matched healthy controls (HCs), and 26 disease controls (DCs). Subjects underwent whole-brain 3 Tesla MRF acquisition, the reconstruction of which generated T1 and T2 relaxometry maps. A 3D region of interest was manually created for each lesion, and z-score normalization using HC data was performed. We conducted 2D classification with ensemble models using MRF T1 and T2 mean and standard deviation from gray matter and white matter for FCD versus controls. Subtype classification additionally incorporated entropy and uniformity of MRF metrics, as well as morphometric features from the morphometric analysis program (MAP). We translated 2D results to individual probabilities using the percentage of slices above an adaptive threshold. These probabilities and clinical variables were input into a support vector machine for individual-level classification. Fivefold cross-validation was performed and performance metrics were reported using receiver-operating-characteristic-curve analyses.
resultsFCD versus HC classification yielded mean sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 0.945, 0.980, and 0.962, respectively; FCD versus DC classification achieved 0.918, 0.965, and 0.939. In comparison, visual review of the clinical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) detected 48% (16/33) of the lesions by official radiology report. In the subgroup where both clinical MRI and MAP were negative, the MRF-ML models correctly distinguished FCD patients from HCs and DCs in 98.3% of cross-validation trials. Type II versus non-type-II classification exhibited mean sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 0.835, 0.823, and 0.83, respectively; type IIa versus IIb classification showed 0.85, 0.9, and 0.87. In comparison, the transmantle sign was present in 58% (7/12) of the IIb cases.
interpretationThe MRF-ML framework presented in this study demonstrated strong efficacy in noninvasively classifying FCD from normal cortex and distinguishing FCD subtypes. ANN NEUROL 2024;96:944-957.
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.