ArticleJournal of advanced research2021
A risk prediction model of gene signatures in ovarian cancer through bagging of GA-XGBoost models.
Article in Journal of advanced research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing the Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence Models in Predicting Ovarian Cancer Survival: A Systematic Review.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) in ovarian cancer: transforming detection, treatment, and prevention.Journal of ovarian research · 2026Review
- Development and validation of machine learning models to predict in-hospital mortality in ICU patients with sepsis and chronic kidney disease.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Explainable machine learning for predicting postoperative length of stay after gastrectomy: a nationwide study using XGBoost and SHAP.Frontiers in medical technology · 2025Article
- Machine learning methods predict recurrence of pN3b gastric cancer after radical resection.Translational cancer research · 2024Article
- Integration of IDPC Clustering Analysis and Interpretable Machine Learning for Survival Risk Prediction of Patients with ESCC.Interdisciplinary sciences, computational life sciences · 2023Article
- Classification prediction of early pulmonary nodes based on weighted gene correlation network analysis and machine learning.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Application of machine learning in the prediction of deficient mismatch repair in patients with colorectal cancer based on routine preoperative characterization.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Early prediction of clinical scores for left ventricular reverse remodeling using extreme gradient random forest, boosting, and logistic regression algorithm representations.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Ovarian cancer (OC) is one of the most frequent gynecologic cancers among women, and high-accuracy risk prediction techniques are essential to effectively select the best intervention strategies and clinical management for OC patients at different risk levels. Current risk prediction models used in OC have low sensitivity, and few of them are able to identify OC patients at high risk of mortality, which would both optimize the treatment of high-risk patients and prevent unnecessary medical intervention in those at low risk. Objectives: To this end, we have developed a bagging-based algorithm with GA-XGBoost models that predicts the risk of death from OC using gene expression profiles. Methods: Four gene expression datasets from public sources were used as training (n = 1) or validation (n = 3) sets. The performance of our proposed algorithm was compared with fine-tuning and other existing methods. Moreover, the biological function of selected genetic features was further interpreted, and the response to a panel of approved drugs was predicted for different risk levels. Results: The proposed algorithm showed good sensitivity (74-100%) in the validation sets, compared with two simple models whose sensitivity only reached 47% and 60%. The prognostic gene signature used in this study was highly connected to Conclusion: These findings demonstrated an improvement in the sensitivity of risk classification of OC patients with our risk prediction models compared with other methods. Ongoing effort is needed to validate the outcomes of this approach for precise clinical treatment.
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.