Back

Redefining Extent Of Resection After Meningioma Surgery: a Multicentre Observational Machine Learning Analysis Comparing Simpson, Radiological and Volumetric Grading

Pandit, A. S.; Deehan, M.; Moudgil-Joshi, J.; Reischer, G.; Mathew, S.; Pace, G.; Fatania, G.; Dalton, A.; Nair, R.; Hyare, H.; Mallon, D.; Kitchen, N.; Marcus, H. J.; Nachev, P.

2026-05-27 oncology
10.64898/2026.05.23.26353944 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Extent of resection remains central to meningioma management, yet Simpson grading is subjective and may not reflect measurable postoperative residual disease. We compared surgeon-reported Simpson grade, report-derived radiological grading, and residual tumour volumetry across a multicentre cohort. Methods: We performed a retrospective study across two tertiary neurosciences centres comprising four hospitals, including patients undergoing primary cranial meningioma resection from 2006 to 2025. Postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports were harmonised using weakly supervised natural language processing based on term frequency-inverse document frequency (TF-IDF) and a linear support vector machine classifier. Residual tumour volume was segmented from contrast-enhanced postoperative MRI and log-transformed. Concordance between Simpson and radiological gross-total/subtotal resection classification was assessed using absolute agreement and prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK). Cox models assessed recurrence-free survival, with bootstrap validation and anatomical and scan-timing sensitivity analyses. Results: Among 912 patients, recurrence or residual progression occurred in 281. Surgical-radiological agreement was substantial but imperfect (absolute agreement 74%; PABAK 0.61), with lower agreement in skull-base and parafalcine-parasagittal tumours. In adjusted models, recurrence hazard increased with Simpson grade (hazard ratio 1.54, 95% confidence interval 1.37-1.72), radiological grade (1.92, 1.68-2.20), and log-transformed residual volume (1.20, 1.16-1.24; all p<0.0005). Optimism corrected concordance increased from Simpson grade to radiological grade and log-volumetry (0.692, 0.733, and 0.748), with this ranking preserved across sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Imaging-based postoperative residual disease measures outperformed Simpson grade. TF-IDF-assisted report-derived grading provides a scalable bridge to volumetry, while quantitative residual volume offers the strongest prognostic representation.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Neuro-Oncology Advances
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
28.6%
2
Neuro-Oncology
30 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.1%
3
Clinical Cancer Research
58 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.5%
50% of probability mass above
4
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 26%
7.0%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 32%
3.8%
6
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
7
npj Precision Oncology
48 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
8
Brain
154 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
9
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
43 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.4%
10
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 59%
1.3%
11
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.3%
12
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 39%
1.1%
13
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 52%
0.9%
14
Acta Neuropathologica
51 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
15
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
16
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
17
Annals of Oncology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
18
Neuropathology and Applied Neurobiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
19
Journal of the Neurological Sciences
17 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
20
Cancer Cell
38 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
21
European Journal of Cancer
10 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
22
Stroke: Vascular and Interventional Neurology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.5%
23
Epilepsia Open
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.5%
24
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
53 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
25
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
26
JCO Precision Oncology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.5%
27
Annals of Neurology
57 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
28
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
13 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
29
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.5%