ArticleCancers2020
Improving Multi-Tumor Biomarker Health Check-up Tests with Machine Learning Algorithms.
Article in Cancers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Diagnostic Power of Circulating miR-1246 in Screening Cancer: An Updated Meta-analysis.Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2023Pooled it
- Paired Capillary and Venous Serum Specimen Agreement for Protein Biomarker Measurements and Risk Category Outputs in a Multi-Cancer Early Detection Tool.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Benchmarking reliability and calibration of LLMs for multi-cancer early detection test communication.JAMIA open · 2026Article
- A Review of Data Engineering in United States Healthcare Infrastructure.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- An Integrative Review of Computational Methods Applied to Biomarkers, Psychological Metrics, and Behavioral Signals for Early Cancer Risk Detection.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence utilization in cancer screening program across ASEAN: a scoping review.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Multicancer Detection (MCD) Testing in Gastrointestinal Cancers: An Evolving Tool for Early Diagnosis.Current gastroenterology reports · 2025Review
- Identifying heterogeneous subgroups of systemic autoimmune diseases by applying a joint dimension reduction and clustering approach to immunomarkers.BioData mining · 2024Article
- Integrating Artificial Intelligence for Advancing Multiple-Cancer Early Detection via Serum Biomarkers: A Narrative Review.Cancers · 2024Review
- Study design considerations for trials to evaluate multicancer early detection assays for clinical utility.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2023Article
- Addressing the Clinical Feasibility of Adopting Circulating miRNA for Breast Cancer Detection, Monitoring and Management with Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Platforms.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Energy Efficiency of Inference Algorithms for Clinical Laboratory Data Sets: Green Artificial Intelligence Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Machine Learning in Prediction of Bladder Cancer on Clinical Laboratory Data.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Uncovering nasopharyngeal carcinoma from chronic rhinosinusitis and healthy subjects using routine medical tests via machine learning.PloS one · 2022Article
- The BUILT study: a single-center 5-year experience of Lung Cancer screening in Taiwan.International journal of medical sciences · 2021Article
- Establishment of a 5-gene risk model related to regulatory T cells for predicting gastric cancer prognosis.Cancer cell international · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTumor markers are used to screen tens of millions of individuals worldwide at annual health check-ups, especially in East Asia. Machine learning (ML)-based algorithms that improve the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of these tests can have substantial impact leading to the early diagnosis of cancer.
methodsML-based algorithms, including a cancer screening algorithm and a secondary organ of origin algorithm, were developed and validated using a large real world dataset (RWD) from asymptomatic individuals undergoing routine cancer screening at a Taiwanese medical center between May 2001 and April 2015. External validation was performed using data from the same period from a separate medical center. The data set included tumor marker values, age, and gender from 27,938 individuals, including 342 subsequently confirmed cancer cases.
resultsSeparate gender-specific cancer screening algorithms were developed. For men, a logistic regression-based algorithm outperformed single-marker and other ML-based algorithms, with a mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.7654 in internal and 0.8736 in external cross validation. For women, a random forest-based algorithm attained a mean AUROC of 0.6665 in internal and 0.6938 in external cross validation. The median time to cancer diagnosis (TTD) in men was 451.5, 204.5, and 28 days for the mild, moderate, and high-risk groups, respectively; for women, the median TTD was 229, 132, and 125 days for the mild, moderate, and high-risk groups. A second algorithm was developed to predict the most likely affected organ systems for at-risk individuals. The algorithm yielded 0.8120 sensitivity and 0.6490 specificity for men, and 0.8170 sensitivity and 0.6750 specificity for women.
conclusionsML-derived algorithms, trained and validated by using a RWD, can significantly improve tumor marker-based screening for multiple types of early stage cancers, suggest the tissue of origin, and provide guidance for patient follow-up.
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.