Background <p>Glioblastoma (GBM) remains one of the most lethal adult primary brain tumors, and neurosurgical decision-making increasingly depends on integrating imaging, molecular, perioperative, and post-treatment data. Artificial intelligence (AI) methods have been proposed for several clinically relevant GBM tasks, but the literature remains heterogeneous and difficult to translate into practice.</p> Methods <p>We performed a PROSPERO-registered systematic review of AI, machine learning, and deep learning studies using MRI-derived and/or multimodal perioperative data in GBM for prognosis, risk stratification, treatment-response assessment, post-treatment classification, recurrence/progression prediction, and molecular prediction. Risk of bias was assessed using PROBAST-informed criteria.</p> Results <p>Thirty studies were included. Survival-focused tasks predominated (20/30, 66.7%), with radiomics plus conventional machine learning as the most common model family (13/30, 43.3%), followed by deep learning (8/30, 26.7%) and hybrid deep learning plus radiomics approaches (4/30, 13.3%). Validation was predominantly internal, and external validation was uncommon (5/30, 16.7%).</p> Conclusions <p>AI shows promise for prognosis and treatment stratification in GBM neurosurgery, but current evidence is limited by heterogeneity, incomplete external validation, and inconsistent methodological reporting.</p> Clinical trial number <p>Not applicable.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

AI for prognosis and treatment stratification in glioblastoma neurosurgery: a systematic review

  • Jheremy S. Reyes,
  • M. Harrison Snyder,
  • Marie Roguski,
  • Constantinos G. Hadjipanayis

摘要

Background

Glioblastoma (GBM) remains one of the most lethal adult primary brain tumors, and neurosurgical decision-making increasingly depends on integrating imaging, molecular, perioperative, and post-treatment data. Artificial intelligence (AI) methods have been proposed for several clinically relevant GBM tasks, but the literature remains heterogeneous and difficult to translate into practice.

Methods

We performed a PROSPERO-registered systematic review of AI, machine learning, and deep learning studies using MRI-derived and/or multimodal perioperative data in GBM for prognosis, risk stratification, treatment-response assessment, post-treatment classification, recurrence/progression prediction, and molecular prediction. Risk of bias was assessed using PROBAST-informed criteria.

Results

Thirty studies were included. Survival-focused tasks predominated (20/30, 66.7%), with radiomics plus conventional machine learning as the most common model family (13/30, 43.3%), followed by deep learning (8/30, 26.7%) and hybrid deep learning plus radiomics approaches (4/30, 13.3%). Validation was predominantly internal, and external validation was uncommon (5/30, 16.7%).

Conclusions

AI shows promise for prognosis and treatment stratification in GBM neurosurgery, but current evidence is limited by heterogeneity, incomplete external validation, and inconsistent methodological reporting.

Clinical trial number

Not applicable.