ArticleJMIR bioinformatics and biotechnology2025
Investigating Associations Between Prognostic Factors in Gliomas: Unsupervised Multiple Correspondence Analysis.
Article in JMIR bioinformatics and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) is an unsupervised data science methodology that aims to identify and represent associations between categorical variables. Gliomas are an aggressive type of cancer characterized by diverse molecular and clinical features that serve as key prognostic factors. Thus, advanced computational approaches are essential to enhance the analysis and interpretation of the associations between clinical and molecular features in gliomas. Objective: This study aims to apply MCA to identify associations between glioma prognostic factors and also explore their associations with stemness phenotype. Methods: Clinical and molecular data from 448 patients with brain tumors were obtained from the Cancer Genome Atlas. The DNA methylation stemness index, derived from DNA methylation patterns, was built using a one-class logistic regression. Associations between variables were evaluated using the χ² test with k degrees of freedom, followed by analysis of the adjusted standardized residuals (ASRs >1.96 indicate a significant association between variables). MCA was used to uncover associations between glioma prognostic factors and stemness. Results: Our analysis revealed significant associations among molecular and clinical characteristics in gliomas. Additionally, we demonstrated the capability of MCA to identify associations between stemness and these prognostic factors. Our results exhibited a strong association between higher DNA methylation stemness index and features related to poorer prognosis such as glioblastoma cancer type (ASR: 8.507), grade 4 (ASR: 8.507), isocitrate dehydrogenase wild type (ASR:15.904), unmethylated MGMT (methylguanine methyltransferase) Promoter (ASR: 9.983), and telomerase reverse transcriptase expression (ASR: 3.351), demonstrating the utility of MCA as an analytical tool for elucidating potential prognostic factors. Conclusions: MCA is a valuable tool for understanding the complex interdependence of prognostic markers in gliomas. MCA facilitates the exploration of large-scale datasets and enhances the identification of significant associations.
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.