Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39698654›Full record

ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024

Radiomics for predicting grades, isocitrate dehydrogenase mutation, and oxygen 6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase promoter methylation of adult diffuse gliomas: combination of structural MRI, apparent diffusion coefficient, and susceptibility-weighted imaging.

Zhengyang Zhu, Jingfei Shen, Xue Liang, Jianan Zhou, Jiawei Liang, Ling Ni, Han Wang, Meiping Ye, Sixuan Chen, Huiquan Yang and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Clinical and VASARI Features to PredictAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025
    Article
  5. OMT and tensor SVD-based deep learning model for segmentation and predicting genetic markers of glioma: A multicenter study.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

20 authors.

Zhengyang Zhu *Department of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Jingfei Shen *School of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, China.
Xue Liang *Department of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Jianan Zhou *Department of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Jiawei LiangSchool of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, China.
Ling NiDepartment of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Han WangNanjing Center for Applied Mathematics, Nanjing, China.
Meiping YeDepartment of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Sixuan ChenDepartment of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Huiquan YangDepartment of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Qian ChenDepartment of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Xin LiDepartment of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Wen ZhangDepartment of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Jiaming LuDepartment of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Danni GeDepartment of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Linqing FuDepartment of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Yajing ZhuDepartment of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Xin ZhangDepartment of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Yu SunSchool of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, China.
Bing ZhangDepartment of Radiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: There has been no research investigating susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) radiomics features in evaluating molecular makers in gliomas. The aim of this study was to assess the predictive value of radiomics features extracted from structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and SWI in determining World Health Organization (WHO) Grade, isocitrate dehydrogenase ( Methods: Retrospective MRI data of 539 patients from University of California San Francisco and Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital between January 2010 and December 2022 were analyzed in this study. The training, internal validation, and external test cohorts included 426 (median age 60 years, 168 female), 67 (median age 56 years, 31 female), and 46 (median age 55 years, 22 female) patients, respectively. A total of 7,896 radiomics features were extracted from structural MRI, ADC, and SWI within two regions of interest (ROIs). Feature selection was conducted using analysis of variance (ANOVA) F-test, and random forest was employed to establish predictive models. Chi-square test and Mann-Whitney Results: For WHO Grade task, the combined model of structural MRI, ADC, and SWI achieved the highest AUC of 0.951 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.886-1.000] on the external test cohort. For IDH mutation task, the structural MRI model achieved the highest AUC of 0.917 (95% CI: 0.801-1.000) on the external test cohort. For MGMT task, the combined model of structural MRI and ADC achieved the highest AUC of 0.650 (95% CI: 0.485-0.814) on the internal validation cohort. Conclusions: The combined structural MRI, ADC, and SWI models achieved promising performance in assessing WHO Grade and

Indexed as

apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC)isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)machine learningradiomicsSusceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI)

Identifiers

PMID39698654
PMCPMC11652054

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.