ArticleBMC cancer2020
Improved personalized survival prediction of patients with diffuse large B-cell Lymphoma using gene expression profiling.
Article in BMC cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial Intelligence for Risk Stratification in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Systematic Review of Classification Models and Predictive Performances.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- Machine learning based on clinical and gene expression data assists in survival prediction and treatment optimization for diffuse large B-Cell lymphoma patients.Annals of hematology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence for risk assessment and outcome prediction in malignant haematology.British journal of haematology · 2026Review
- Machine Learning Models for Cancer Research: A Narrative Review of Bulk RNA-Seq Applications.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the new era: prognostic tools for mapping risk.Annals of hematology · 2025Review
- Dual-stream cross-modal fusion alignment network for survival analysis.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- An interpretable survival model for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients using a biologically informed visible neural network.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Article
- Review
- Incorporation of emergent symptoms and genetic covariates improves prediction of aromatase inhibitor therapy discontinuation.JAMIA open · 2024Article
- Genetic and transcriptomic analyses of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients with poor outcomes within two years of diagnosis.Leukemia · 2024Article
- A prognostic model based on gene expression parameters predicts a better response to bortezomib-containing immunochemotherapy in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Avoiding C-hacking when evaluating survival distribution predictions with discrimination measures.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- Unsupervised machine learning improves risk stratification in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: an analysis of the Spanish Myeloma Group.Blood cancer journal · 2022Article
- Prognostic Stratification of Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma Using Clinico-genomic Models: Validation and Improvement of the LymForest-25 Model.HemaSphere · 2022Article
- Personally Tailored Survival Prediction of Patients With Follicular Lymphoma Using Machine Learning Transcriptome-Based Models.Frontiers in oncology · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThirty to forty percent of patients with Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) have an adverse clinical evolution. The increased understanding of DLBCL biology has shed light on the clinical evolution of this pathology, leading to the discovery of prognostic factors based on gene expression data, genomic rearrangements and mutational subgroups. Nevertheless, additional efforts are needed in order to enable survival predictions at the patient level. In this study we investigated new machine learning-based models of survival using transcriptomic and clinical data.
methodsGene expression profiling (GEP) of in 2 different publicly available retrospective DLBCL cohorts were analyzed. Cox regression and unsupervised clustering were performed in order to identify probes associated with overall survival on the largest cohort. Random forests were created to model survival using combinations of GEP data, COO classification and clinical information. Cross-validation was used to compare model results in the training set, and Harrel's concordance index (c-index) was used to assess model's predictability. Results were validated in an independent test set.
resultsTwo hundred thirty-three and sixty-four patients were included in the training and test set, respectively. Initially we derived and validated a 4-gene expression clusterization that was independently associated with lower survival in 20% of patients. This pattern included the following genes: TNFRSF9, BIRC3, BCL2L1 and G3BP2. Thereafter, we applied machine-learning models to predict survival. A set of 102 genes was highly predictive of disease outcome, outperforming available clinical information and COO classification. The final best model integrated clinical information, COO classification, 4-gene-based clusterization and the expression levels of 50 individual genes (training set c-index, 0.8404, test set c-index, 0.7942).
conclusionOur results indicate that DLBCL survival models based on the application of machine learning algorithms to gene expression and clinical data can largely outperform other important prognostic variables such as disease stage and COO. Head-to-head comparisons with other risk stratification models are needed to compare its usefulness.
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.