ArticlePloS one2025
Machine learning-based prediction of glioma grading.
Article in PloS one, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveGliomas are among the most common and heterogeneous primary tumours of the central nervous system. Accurate grading is essential for treatment planning and prognosis, yet conventional histopathological approaches are limited by subjectivity and poor reproducibility. This study aimed to develop a machine learning-based prediction model that integrates clinical and molecular characteristics to improve early glioma grading, thereby enhancing diagnostic accuracy and supporting individualized treatment strategies.
methodsAn efficient prediction model for low-grade gliomas (LGGs) and glioblastoma (grade IV, GBM) was developed by utilizing the clinical and molecular characteristics of gliomas from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) dataset. A novel integration of recursive feature elimination (RFE) with random forest (RF) and elastic net regression (ENR) was implemented to select features efficiently. Additionally, the synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) was applied to balance the training set, and K-nearest neighbours (KNN), support vector machine (SVM), and other algorithms were optimized through random-search hyper-parameter optimization (HPO) with five-fold cross-validation, yielding nine distinct machine learning (ML) models. Ultimately, by applying the voting and stacking algorithms, 34 ensemble learning models were constructed. Furthermore, all the models were externally validated using the Chinese Glioma Genome Atlas (CGGA) dataset. Finally, SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis was conducted to elucidate the prediction processes of the ensemble models.
resultsFeature selection revealed 11 key grading features, including Tumour Protein 53 (TP53) and Isocitrate Dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1). Among the 9 basic models constructed by combining optimization techniques such as SMOTE, the RF model had the best performance (Area Under Curve (AUC) of 0.916 for TCGA and 0.797 for CGGA). Among the 34 integrated models constructed, the Voting25 model integrating RF, Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), and KNN achieved AUC values of 0.928 and 0.794, respectively, on the TCGA and CGGA datasets, demonstrating overall optimal predictive performance.
conclusionEleven key features have been identified that facilitate molecular detection and personalized targeted therapy for glioma. Nine models were developed and optimized, and the RF model was observed to provide the best performance, potentially guiding future ML-related research in glioma. Additionally, the voting ensemble method, which integrates RF, XGBoost, and KNN, was shown to achieve superior performance, thereby enhancing both accuracy and robustness. Finally, all the models were successfully validated on the CGGA dataset, indicating strong generalizability.
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.