Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40730976›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2025

A data assimilation framework for predicting the spatiotemporal response of high-grade gliomas to chemoradiation.

Hugo J M Miniere, David A Hormuth, Ernesto A B F Lima, Maguy Farhat, Bikash Panthi, Holly Langshaw, Mihir D Shanker, Wasif Talpur, Sara Thrower, Jodi Goldman and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

13 authors.

Hugo J M MiniereDepartments of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, 107 W Dean Keeton Street Stop C0800, Austin, TX, 78712, USA.
David A HormuthLivestrong Cancer Institutes, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 78712, USA.
Ernesto A B F LimaOden Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 78712, USA.
Maguy FarhatDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Bikash PanthiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Holly LangshawDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Mihir D ShankerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Wasif TalpurDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Sara ThrowerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Jodi GoldmanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Sophia TyOden Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 78712, USA.
Caroline ChungDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Thomas E YankeelovDepartments of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, 107 W Dean Keeton Street Stop C0800, Austin, TX, 78712, USA. tey@utexas.edu.

Funding

INTEGRATING OMICS AND QUANTITATIVE IMAGING DATA IN CO-CLINICAL TRIALS TO PREDICT TREATMENT RESPONSE IN TRIPLE NEGATIVE BREAST CANCERU24CA226110 · NCI · BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE · PI LEWIS, MICHAEL T., RUBIN, DANIEL L · 2019 to 2023
$3.2M
Quantitative Multiscale Imaging to Optimize Cancer Treatment StrategiesR01CA186193 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI QUARANTA, VITO, RERICHA, ERIN C · 2014 to 2019
$3.1M
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
Personalizing immunotherapy in HER2+ breast cancer through quantitative imagingR01CA240589 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI SORACE, ANNA C · 2020 to 2023
$1.6M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA186193NCI NIH HHS R01 CA240589NCI NIH HHS R01CA240589, U01CA174706, R01 CA186193, U24 CA226110, U01CA25354, CPRIT RR160005 and CPRIT RP220250NCI NIH HHS U01 CA174706NCI NIH HHS U24 CA226110
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHigh-grade gliomas are highly invasive and respond variably to chemoradiation. Accurate, patient-specific predictions of tumor response could enhance treatment planning. We present a novel computational platform that assimilates MRI data to continually predict spatiotemporal tumor changes during chemoradiotherapy.

methodsTumor growth and response to chemoradiation was described using a two-species reaction-diffusion model of enhancing and non-enhancing regions of the tumor. Two evaluation scenarios were used to test the predictive accuracy of this model. In scenario 1, the model was calibrated on a patient-specific basis (n = 21) to weekly MRI data during the course of chemoradiotherapy. A data assimilation framework was used to update model parameters with each new imaging visit which were then used to update model predictions. In scenario 2, we evaluated the predictive accuracy of the model when fewer data points are available by calibrating the same model using only the first two imaging visits and then predicted tumor response at the remaining five weeks of treatment. We investigated three approaches to assign model parameters for scenario 2: (1) predictions using only parameters estimated by fitting the data obtained from an individual patient's first two imaging visits, (2) predictions made by averaging the patient-specific parameters with the cohort-derived parameters, and (3) predictions using only cohort-derived parameters.

resultsScenario 1 achieved a median [range] concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) between the predicted and measured total tumor cell counts of 0.91 [0.84, 0.95], and a median [range] percent error in tumor volume of -2.6% [-19.7, 8.0%], demonstrating strong agreement throughout the course of treatment. For scenario 2, the three approaches yielded CCCs of: (1) 0.65 [0.51, 0.88], (2) 0.74 [0.70, 0.91], (3) 0.76 [0.73, 0.92] with significant differences between the approach (1) that does not use the cohort parameters and the two approaches (2 and 3) that do.

conclusionsThe proposed data assimilation framework enhances the accuracy of tumor growth forecasts by integrating patient-specific and cohort-based data. These findings show a practical method for identifying more personalized treatment strategies in high-grade glioma patients.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsChemoradiotherapyGliomaFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNeoplasm GradingTreatment OutcomeComputational oncologyGliomaImagingMathematical modelingPersonalized medicine

Identifiers

PMID40730976
PMCPMC12308963

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.