ArticleNeuro-oncology advances
Machine learning prediction of brain metastasis invasion pattern on brain magnetic resonance imaging scans.
Article in Neuro-oncology advances. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Magnetic resonance imaging characteristics of brain metastases from lung cancer.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Brain imaging screening in metastatic breast cancer: patients' and physicians' perspectives.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2025Article
- Current Treatment Paradigms for Advanced Melanoma with Brain Metastases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Brain metastasis invasion pattern (BMIP) is an emerging biomarker associated with recurrence-free and overall survival in patients, and differential response to therapy in preclinical models. Currently, BMIP can only be determined from the histopathological examination of surgical specimens, precluding its use as a biomarker prior to therapy initiation. The aim of this study was to investigate the potential of machine learning (ML) approaches to develop a noninvasive magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based biomarker for BMIP determination. Methods: From an initial cohort of 329 patients, a subset of 132 patients met the inclusion criteria for this retrospective study. We evaluated the ability of an expert neuroradiologist to reliably predict BMIP. Thereafter, the dataset was randomly divided into training/validation (80% of cases) and test subsets (20% of cases). The ground truth for BMIP was the histopathologic evaluation of resected specimens. Following MRI sequence co-registration, advanced feature extraction techniques deriving hand-crafted radiomic features with traditional ML classifiers and convolution-based deep learning (CDL) models were trained and evaluated. Different ML approaches were used individually or using ensembling techniques to determine the model with the best performance for BMIP prediction. Results: Expert evaluation of brain MRI scans could not reliably predict BMIP, with an accuracy of 44%-59% depending on the semantic feature used. Among the different ML and CDL models evaluated, the best-performing model achieved an accuracy of 85% and an F1 score of 90%. Conclusions: ML approaches can effectively predict BMIP, representing a noninvasive MRI-based approach to guide the management of patients with brain metastases.
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.