ArticleBMC medical imaging2025
Improving radiomics-based isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 prediction in glioma patients using semi-supervised machine learning models.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDetermining isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutation status in glioma is important for determining prognosis. We aimed to compare supervised and semi-supervised machine learning (ML) models in glioma IDH1 mutation status prediction using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-derived radiomics features.
methodsImages and segmentation masks from several public collections, including ACRIN-FMISO, CPTAC-GBM, IvyGAP, TCGA-GBM, TCGA-LGG, UCSF-PDGM, UPENN-GBM, and REMBRANDT, were retrieved from The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA) portal. These data were divided into training cohort 1, unlabeled cohort, holdout internal validation (HOIV) cohort, and external validation (EV) cohort. After image preprocessing, radiomics features were extracted from T1-weighted, T1 contrast-enhanced (T1CE), T2-weighted, and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) sequences. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso) algorithm was used for feature selection. Supervised and semi-supervised models were then constructed using 10 ML algorithms and various sequence combinations. For supervised models, we used training cohort 1 to develop the models. Regarding semi-supervised models, we initially predicted the labels of the unlabeled cohort using the training cohort 1 (pseudolabeling), then concatenated the training cohort 1 with these pseudolabeled data to create training cohort 2, and subsequently developed models using the training cohort 2. Both supervised and semi-supervised models were then validated on HOIV and EV cohorts.
resultsData for 436, 151, 110, and 535 patients were included in the training cohort 1, unlabeled cohort, HOIV cohort, and EV cohort, respectively. A semi-supervised model using 24 features from T1CE images yielded the highest AUC on EV (0.951), which was significantly higher than the best supervised model (AUC = 0.917, p = 0.005). The latter model was constructed using 30 features from FLAIR and T1CE sequences. Furthermore, across all sequence combinations, the semi-supervised models consistently achieved higher AUCs in the EV cohort.
conclusionSemi-supervised approaches may improve the performance of radiomics-based ML models in predicting glioma IDH1 status. Using pseudolabels, these models can increase the size of training data, potentially leading to enhancement of model predictive performance. Additionally, these models may improve prediction efficiency by requiring fewer image sequences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.