The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Outcome Prediction in Patients with Glioblastoma by Using Imaging, Clinical, and Genomic Biomarkers: Focus on the Nonenhancing Component of the Tumor
Open accessAbstract
PURPOSE: To correlate patient survival with morphologic imaging features and hemodynamic parameters obtained from the nonenhancing region (NER) of glioblastoma (GBM), along with clinical and genomic markers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An institutional review board waiver was obtained for this HIPAA-compliant retrospective study. Forty-five patients with GBM underwent baseline imaging with contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced T2*-weighted perfusion MR imaging. Molecular and clinical predictors of survival were obtained. Single and multivariable models of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were explored with Kaplan-Meier estimates, Cox regression, and random survival forests. RESULTS: Worsening OS (log-rank test, P = .0103) and PFS (log-rank test, P = .0223) were associated with increasing relative cerebral blood volume of NER (rCBVNER), which was higher with deep white matter involvement (t test, P = .0482) and poor NER margin definition (t test, P = .0147). NER crossing the midline was the only morphologic feature of NER associated with poor survival (log-rank test, P = .0125). Preoperative Karnofsky performance score (KPS) and resection extent (n = 30) were clinically significant OS predictors (log-rank test, P = .0176 and P = .0038, respectively). No genomic alterations were associated with survival, except patients with high rCBVNER and wild-type epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation had significantly poor survival (log-rank test, P = .0306; area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.62). Combining resection extent with rCBVNER marginally improved prognostic ability (permutation, P = .084). Random forest models of presurgical predictors indicated rCBVNER as the top predictor; also important were KPS, age at diagnosis, and NER crossing the midline. A multivariable model containing rCBVNER, age at diagnosis, and KPS can be used to group patients with more than 1 year of difference in observed median survival (0.49-1.79 years). CONCLUSION: Patients with high rCBVNER and NER crossing the midline and those with high rCBVNER and wild-type EGFR mutation showed poor survival. In multivariable survival models, however, rCBVNER provided unique prognostic information that went above and beyond the assessment of all NER imaging features, as well as clinical and genomic features.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Comprehensive genomic characterization defines human glioblastoma genes and core pathways
The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network (2008) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature07385 · Cited by 7,735
Verhaak, R. G. W., Hoadley, K. A., Purdom, E., Wang, V., Qi, Y., Wilkerson, M. D., Miller, C. R., Ding, L., Golub, T., Mesirov, J. P., et al. (2010) · Cancer Cell · doi:10.1016/j.ccr.2009.12.020 · Cited by 7,575
Stummer, W., Pichlmeier, U., Meinel, T., Wiestler, O. D., Zanella, F., & Reulen, H.-J. (2006) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(06)70665-9 · Cited by 3,423
Ishwaran, H., Kogalur, U. B., Blackstone, E. H., & Lauer, M. S. (2008) · The Annals of Applied Statistics · doi:10.1214/08-aoas169 · Cited by 2,714
Cited by
Bakas, S., Akbari, H., Sotiras, A., Bilello, M., Rozycki, M., Kirby, J. S., Freymann, J. B., Farahani, K., & Davatzikos, C. (2017) · Scientific Data · doi:10.1038/sdata.2017.117 · Cited by 3,049
Self-citationMachine Learning methods for Quantitative Radiomic Biomarkers
Parmar, C., Grossmann, P., Bussink, J., Lambin, P., & Aerts, H. J. W. L. (2015) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep13087 · Cited by 1,019
CT Radiogenomic Characterization of EGFR, K-RAS, and ALK Mutations in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Rizzo, S., Petrella, F., Buscarino, V., De Maria, F., Raimondi, S., Barberis, M., Fumagalli, C., Spitaleri, G., Rampinelli, C., De Marinis, F., et al. (2016) · European Radiology · doi:10.1007/s00330-015-3814-0 · Cited by 270
Nie, D., Lu, J., Zhang, H., Adeli, E., Wang, J., Yu, Z., Liu, L., Wang, Q., Wu, J., & Shen, D. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-37387-9 · Cited by 213
Jansen, R. W., van Amstel, P., Martens, R. M., Kooi, I. E., Wesseling, P., de Langen, A. J., Menke-Van der Houven van Oordt, C. W., Jansen, B. H. E., Moll, A. C., Dorsman, J. C., et al. (2018) · Oncotarget · doi:10.18632/oncotarget.24893 · Cited by 63
Metadata
- Authors
- Jain, R., Poisson, L. M., Gutman, D., Scarpace, L., Hwang, S. N., Holder, C. A., Wintermark, M., Rao, A., Colen, R. R., Kirby, J., Freymann, J., Jaffe, C. C., Mikkelsen, T., & Flanders, A.
- Venue
- Radiology
- Published
- 2014-08
- Volume
- 272
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 484-493
- ISSN
- 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2117060022
- Cited by
- 234
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 8.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Outcome Prediction in Patients with Glioblastoma by Using Imaging, Clinical, and Genomic Biomarkers: Focus on the Nonenhancing Component of the Tumor. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.14131691
- The paper
- Jain, R., Poisson, L. M., Gutman, D., Scarpace, L., Hwang, S. N., Holder, C. A., Wintermark, M., Rao, A., Colen, R. R., Kirby, J., Freymann, J., Jaffe, C. C., Mikkelsen, T., & Flanders, A. (2014). Outcome Prediction in Patients with Glioblastoma by Using Imaging, Clinical, and Genomic Biomarkers: Focus on the Nonenhancing Component of the Tumor. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14131691
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.