Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024;32(3):1977-1990.
doi: 10.3233/THC-231645.

Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for glioma grade using machine learning

Affiliations

Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for glioma grade using machine learning

Mingzhen Wu et al. Technol Health Care. 2024.

Expression of concern in

  • Expression of concern.
    [No authors listed] [No authors listed] Technol Health Care. 2025 Nov 12:9287329251392360. doi: 10.1177/09287329251392360. Online ahead of print. Technol Health Care. 2025. PMID: 41223024 No abstract available.

Abstract

Background: Histopathological evaluation is currently the gold standard for grading gliomas; however, this technique is invasive.

Objective: This study aimed to develop and validate a diagnostic prediction model for glioma by employing multiple machine learning algorithms to identify risk factors associated with high-grade glioma, facilitating the prediction of glioma grading.

Methods: Data from 1114 eligible glioma patients were obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database, which was divided into a training set (n= 781) and a test set (n= 333). Fifty machine learning algorithms were employed, and the optimal algorithm was selected to construct a prediction model. The performance of the machine learning prediction model was compared to the clinical prediction model in terms of discrimination, calibration, and clinical validity to assess the performance of the prediction model.

Results: The area under the curve (AUC) values of the machine learning prediction models (training set: 0.870 vs. 0.740, test set: 0.863 vs. 0.718) were significantly improved from the clinical prediction models. Furthermore, significant improvement in discrimination was observed for the Integrated Discrimination Improvement (IDI) (training set: 0.230, test set: 0.270) and Net Reclassification Index (NRI) (training set: 0.170, test set: 0.170) from the clinical prognostic model. Both models showed a high goodness of fit and an increased net benefit.

Conclusion: A strong prediction accuracy model can be developed using machine learning algorithms to screen for high-grade glioma risk predictors, which can serve as a non-invasive prediction tool for preoperative diagnostic grading of glioma.

Keywords: Glioma; grading; machine learning; prediction model; risk predictors.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources