↓ Skip to main content

Machine learning: a useful radiological adjunct in determination of a newly diagnosed glioma’s grade and IDH status

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neuro-Oncology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Machine learning: a useful radiological adjunct in determination of a newly diagnosed glioma’s grade and IDH status
Published in
Journal of Neuro-Oncology, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11060-018-2895-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Céline De Looze, Alan Beausang, Jane Cryan, Teresa Loftus, Patrick G. Buckley, Michael Farrell, Seamus Looby, Richard Reilly, Francesca Brett, Hugh Kearney

Abstract

Machine learning methods have been introduced as a computer aided diagnostic tool, with applications to glioma characterisation on MRI. Such an algorithmic approach may provide a useful adjunct for a rapid and accurate diagnosis of a glioma. The aim of this study is to devise a machine learning algorithm that may be used by radiologists in routine practice to aid diagnosis of both: WHO grade and IDH mutation status in de novo gliomas. To evaluate the status quo, we interrogated the accuracy of neuroradiology reports in relation to WHO grade: grade II 96.49% (95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.88, 0.99); III 36.51% (95% CI 0.24, 0.50); IV 72.9% (95% CI 0.67, 0.78). We derived five MRI parameters from the same diagnostic brain scans, in under two minutes per case, and then supplied these data to a random forest algorithm. Machine learning resulted in a high level of accuracy in prediction of tumour grade: grade II/III; area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) = 98%, sensitivity = 0.82, specificity = 0.94; grade II/IV; AUC = 100%, sensitivity = 1.0, specificity = 1.0; grade III/IV; AUC = 97%, sensitivity = 0.83, specificity = 0.97. Furthermore, machine learning also facilitated the discrimination of IDH status: AUC of 88%, sensitivity = 0.81, specificity = 0.77. These data demonstrate the ability of machine learning to accurately classify diffuse gliomas by both WHO grade and IDH status from routine MRI alone-without significant image processing, which may facilitate usage as a diagnostic adjunct in clinical practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Student > Master 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 13 23%
Unknown 19 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Engineering 2 4%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 25 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 May 2018.
All research outputs
#20,493,843
of 23,057,470 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#2,589
of 2,989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#288,021
of 327,739 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#59
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,057,470 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,989 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,739 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.