ArticleJournal, genetic engineering & biotechnology2026
Enhancing clinical insights in glioma grading using Bayesian Optimization and Explainable AI.
Article in Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate glioma grading is paramount for guiding treatment strategies and predicting patient prognosis. This study introduces a novel and clinically relevant framework for glioma grade classification, specifically distinguishing between low-grade gliomas (LGG) and glioblastomas (GBM), by leveraging the unique strengths of Generalized Additive Models (GAMs). GAMs, chosen for their ability to model complex, non-linear relationships while maintaining inherent interpretability, were optimized using Bayesian Optimization for efficient hyperparameter tuning and augmented by Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methodologies. The 'Glioma Grading Clinical and Mutation Features' dataset from Kaggle underwent meticulous preprocessing. A feature ranking algorithm identified the most informative features, reducing noise and enhancing model accuracy. The Bayesian-optimized GAM achieved an accuracy of 0.9012 and F1-score of 0.8975 on a held-out test set, demonstrating superior or competitive performance compared to other established models, including Random Forest, LogitBoost, Support Vector Machines, and Artificial Neural Networks. Notably, among these traditional methods, the Random Forest performed strongly on the training set (accuracy 0.8899); however, GAM outperformed in the test set. To elucidate model decision-making and promote clinical translation, XAI techniques, including Permutation Feature Importance (PFI), SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), and Partial Dependence Plots (PDPs), were employed. PFI identified IDH1 as the most critical predictor, while SHAP values revealed that, in addition to IDH1, features like Age, PTEN, ATRX, and CIC have considerable influence on model predictions. Furthermore, PDPs demonstrated the non-linear functional relationships of these features with the predicted outcome. These techniques provided interpretable insights into both global and local feature effects, highlighted the non-linearities in the data, and fostered trust in the model's predictions. This study demonstrates that integrating GAMs, Bayesian Optimization, and XAI techniques provides a robust, accurate, and clinically interpretable framework for glioma grade classification, showcasing their potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy, improve clinicians' understanding of glioma biology, and ultimately inform more personalized treatment strategies.
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.