ArticleOncology letters2019
Predicting prognosis of endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma on the basis of gene expression and clinical features using Random Forest.
Article in Oncology letters, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prognostic impact of metabolic syndrome in patients with primary endometrial cancer: a retrospective bicentric study.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024Article
- A comprehensive prognostic score for head and neck squamous cancer driver genes and phenotype traits.Discover oncology · 2023Article
- Relations between Structure/Composition and Mechanics in Osteoarthritic Regenerated Articular Tissue: A Machine Learning Approach.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Global endometrial DNA methylation analysis reveals insights into mQTL regulation and associated endometriosis disease risk and endometrial function.Communications biology · 2023Article
- Interpretable Machine-Learning and Big Data Mining to Predict Gas Diffusivity in Metal-Organic Frameworks.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- Large-Scale Screening and Machine Learning for Metal-Organic Framework Membranes to Capture COMembranes · 2022Article
- Machine Learning for Endometrial Cancer Prediction and Prognostication.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- Article
- Review
- Identification of a Metabolism-Related Signature for the Prediction of Survival in Endometrial Cancer Patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Comprehensive Analysis of the Glycolysis-Related Gene Prognostic Signature and Immune Infiltration in Endometrial Cancer.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traditional clinical features are not sufficient to accurately judge the prognosis of endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma (EEA). Molecular biological characteristics and traditional clinical features are particularly important in the prognosis of EEA. The aim of the present study was to establish a predictive model that considers genes and clinical features for the prognosis of EEA. The clinical and RNA sequencing expression data of EEA were derived from samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and Peking University People's Hospital (PKUPH; Beijing, China). Samples from TCGA were used as the training set, and samples from the PKUPH were used as the testing set. Variable selection using Random Forests (VSURF) was used to select the genes and clinical features on the basis of TCGA samples. The RF classification method was used to establish the prediction model. Kaplan-Meier curves were tested with the log-rank test. The results from this study demonstrated that on the basis of TCGA samples, 11 genes and the grade were selected as the input features. In the training set, the out-of-bag (OOB) error of RF model-1, which was established using the '11 genes', was 0.15; the OOB error of RF model-2, which was established using the 'grade', was 0.39; and the OOB error of RF model-3, established using the '11 genes and grade', was 0.15. In the testing set, the classification accuracy of RF model-1, model-2 and model-3 was 71.43, 66.67 and 80.95%, respectively. In conclusion, to the best of our knowledge, the VSURF was used to select features relevant to EEA prognosis, and an EEA predictive model combining genes and traditional features was established for the first time in the present study. The prediction accuracy of the RF model on the basis of the 11 genes and grade was markedly higher than that of the RF models established by either the 11 genes or grade alone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.