Table 1. Open in new tab (a) Analysis of...

(a) Analysis of Deviance for Different Cox Regression Models (ANOVA)
Molecular¹ + Clinical²	Molecular¹ + Clinical² + Radiomic signature	<0.01	34.3	0.01	6.2	<0.01	10.4	<0.01	8.0
Molecular¹ + Clinical²	Molecular¹ + Clinical² + Tumor volumes³	0.79	1.0	0.19	4.7	0.21	4.6	0.14	5.4
*(b) Performance Metrics of the Different Cox Regression Models*
Model	Integrated Brier Score (IBS) (percent reduction of IBS compared with the null model⁴)
	OS	PFS
Single layer	Molecular¹	0.149	−9%	0.121	−12%
	Clinical²	0.133	−18%	0.126	−9%
	Tumor volumes³	0.160	−2%	0.135	−2%
	Radiomic signature	0.137	−16%	0.125	−9%
Two layers	Molecular¹ + Clinical²	0.119	−27%	0.098	−29%
	Clinical² + Radiomic signature	0.116	−29%	0.117	−15%
	Molecular¹ + Radiomic signature	0.122	−25%	0.109	−21%
Three layers	Molecular¹ + Clinical² + Radiomic signature	0.103	−37%	0.089	−36%

(a) Analysis of Deviance for Different Cox Regression Models (ANOVA)

Model 1

Model 2

Discovery Set

Validation Set

PFS

chi²

Molecular¹ + Clinical²

Molecular¹ + Clinical² + Radiomic signature

<0.01

34.3

0.01

6.2

<0.01

10.4

<0.01

8.0

Molecular¹ + Clinical²

Molecular¹ + Clinical² + Tumor volumes³

0.79

1.0

0.19

4.7

0.21

4.6

0.14

5.4

(b) Performance Metrics of the Different Cox Regression Models

Model

Integrated Brier Score (IBS)
(percent reduction of IBS compared with the null model⁴)

PFS

Single layer

Molecular¹

0.149

−9%

0.121

−12%

Clinical²

0.133

−18%

0.126

−9%

Tumor volumes³

0.160

−2%

0.135

−2%

Radiomic signature

0.137

−16%

0.125

−9%

Two layers

Molecular¹ + Clinical²

0.119

−27%

0.098

−29%

Clinical² + Radiomic signature

0.116

−29%

0.117

−15%

Molecular¹ + Radiomic signature

0.122

−25%

0.109

−21%

Three layers

Molecular¹ + Clinical² + Radiomic signature

0.103

−37%

0.089

−36%

(a) Analysis of Deviance for Different Cox Regression Models (ANOVA)
Molecular¹ + Clinical²	Molecular¹ + Clinical² + Radiomic signature	<0.01	34.3	0.01	6.2	<0.01	10.4	<0.01	8.0
Molecular¹ + Clinical²	Molecular¹ + Clinical² + Tumor volumes³	0.79	1.0	0.19	4.7	0.21	4.6	0.14	5.4
*(b) Performance Metrics of the Different Cox Regression Models*
Model	Integrated Brier Score (IBS) (percent reduction of IBS compared with the null model⁴)
	OS	PFS
Single layer	Molecular¹	0.149	−9%	0.121	−12%
	Clinical²	0.133	−18%	0.126	−9%
	Tumor volumes³	0.160	−2%	0.135	−2%
	Radiomic signature	0.137	−16%	0.125	−9%
Two layers	Molecular¹ + Clinical²	0.119	−27%	0.098	−29%
	Clinical² + Radiomic signature	0.116	−29%	0.117	−15%
	Molecular¹ + Radiomic signature	0.122	−25%	0.109	−21%
Three layers	Molecular¹ + Clinical² + Radiomic signature	0.103	−37%	0.089	−36%

Table 1.

Open in new tab

(a) Analysis of deviance for different Cox regression models (ANOVA) was used to determine whether the radiomic signature or the tumor volume increased the model fit beyond key molecular and clinical characteristics. (b) Performance metrics of the different Cox regression models based on prediction error curves over time with the integrated Brier score (lower values indicate better performance)

(a) Analysis of Deviance for Different Cox Regression Models (ANOVA)
Model 1	Model 2	Discovery Set				Validation Set
		OS		PFS		OS		PFS
		P	chi²	P	chi²	P	chi²	P	chi²
Molecular¹ + Clinical²	Molecular¹ + Clinical² + Radiomic signature	<0.01	34.3	0.01	6.2	<0.01	10.4	<0.01	8.0
Molecular¹ + Clinical²	Molecular¹ + Clinical² + Tumor volumes³	0.79	1.0	0.19	4.7	0.21	4.6	0.14	5.4
*(b) Performance Metrics of the Different Cox Regression Models*
Model				Integrated Brier Score (IBS) (percent reduction of IBS compared with the null model⁴)
Model					OS			PFS
Single layer	Molecular¹				0.149	−9%		0.121	−12%
	Clinical²				0.133	−18%		0.126	−9%
	Tumor volumes³				0.160	−2%		0.135	−2%
	Radiomic signature				0.137	−16%		0.125	−9%
Two layers	Molecular¹ + Clinical²				0.119	−27%		0.098	−29%
	Clinical² + Radiomic signature				0.116	−29%		0.117	−15%
	Molecular¹ + Radiomic signature				0.122	−25%		0.109	−21%
Three layers	Molecular¹ + Clinical² + Radiomic signature				0.103	−37%		0.089	−36%

(a) Analysis of Deviance for Different Cox Regression Models (ANOVA)
Model 1	Model 2	Discovery Set				Validation Set
		OS		PFS		OS		PFS
		P	chi²	P	chi²	P	chi²	P	chi²
Molecular¹ + Clinical²	Molecular¹ + Clinical² + Radiomic signature	<0.01	34.3	0.01	6.2	<0.01	10.4	<0.01	8.0
Molecular¹ + Clinical²	Molecular¹ + Clinical² + Tumor volumes³	0.79	1.0	0.19	4.7	0.21	4.6	0.14	5.4
*(b) Performance Metrics of the Different Cox Regression Models*
Model				Integrated Brier Score (IBS) (percent reduction of IBS compared with the null model⁴)
Model					OS			PFS
Single layer	Molecular¹				0.149	−9%		0.121	−12%
	Clinical²				0.133	−18%		0.126	−9%
	Tumor volumes³				0.160	−2%		0.135	−2%
	Radiomic signature				0.137	−16%		0.125	−9%
Two layers	Molecular¹ + Clinical²				0.119	−27%		0.098	−29%
	Clinical² + Radiomic signature				0.116	−29%		0.117	−15%
	Molecular¹ + Radiomic signature				0.122	−25%		0.109	−21%
Three layers	Molecular¹ + Clinical² + Radiomic signature				0.103	−37%		0.089	−36%

Annotation: 1 = including MGMT promoter methylation status and global DNA methylation glioblastoma subtypes; 2 = including patient’s age, KPS, EOR, and adjuvant treatment; 3 = including tumor volumes from contrast enhancement, necrosis, and edema; 4 = IBSs for the null (reference) models were 0.163 for OS and 0.138 for PFS.

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only