Accuracy of Machine Learning Algorithms for the Classification of Molecular Features of Gliomas on MRI: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary Glioma prognosis and treatment are based on histopathological characteristics and molecular profile. Following the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines (2016), the most important molecular diagnostic markers include IDH1/2-genotype and 1p/19q codeletion status, although more recent publications also include ARTX genotype and TERT- and MGMT promoter methylation. Machine learning algorithms (MLAs), however, were described to successfully determine these molecular characteristics non-invasively by using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data. The aim of this review and meta-analysis was to define the diagnostic accuracy of MLAs with regard to these different molecular markers. We found high accuracies of MLAs to predict each individual molecular marker, with IDH1/2-genotype being the most investigated and the most accurate. Radiogenomics could therefore be a promising tool for discriminating genetically determined gliomas in a non-invasive fashion. Although encouraging results are presented here, large-scale, prospective trials with external validation groups are warranted. Treatment planning and prognosis in glioma treatment are based on the classification into low- and high-grade oligodendroglioma or astrocytoma, which is mainly based on molecular characteristics (IDH1/2- and 1p/19q codeletion status). It would be of great value if this classification could be made reliably before surgery, without biopsy. Machine learning algorithms (MLAs) could play a role in achieving this by enabling glioma characterization on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data without invasive tissue sampling. The aim of this study is to provide a performance evaluation and meta-analysis of various MLAs for glioma characterization. Systematic literature search and meta-analysis were performed on the aggregated data, after which subgroup analyses for several target conditions were conducted. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020191033. We identified 724 studies; 60 and 17 studies were eligible to be included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, respectively. Meta-analysis showed excellent accuracy for all subgroups, with the classification of 1p/19q codeletion status scoring significantly poorer than other subgroups (AUC: 0.748, p = 0.132). There was considerable heterogeneity among some of the included studies. Although promising results were found with regard to the ability of MLA-tools to be used for the non-invasive classification of gliomas, large-scale, prospective trials with external validation are warranted in the future.