ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2021
Combined Identification of Novel Markers for Diagnosis and Prognostic of Classic Hodgkin Lymphoma.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predicting survival of Hodgkin lymphoma using machine learning-an analysis based on the SEER database.Annals of hematology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence for risk assessment and outcome prediction in malignant haematology.British journal of haematology · 2026Review
- Inhibitory leukocyte immunoglobulin-like receptors, subfamily B (LILRBs) in human diseases: structure, roles, mechanisms, and clinical applications.Theranostics · 2025Review
- Immune and stromal transcriptional patterns that influence the outcome of classic Hodgkin lymphoma.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Applications of machine learning in tumor-associated macrophages.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn effective diagnostic and prognostic marker based on the gene expression profile of classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) has not yet been developed. The aim of the present study was to investigate potential markers for the diagnosis and prediction of cHL prognosis.
methodsThe gene expression profiles with all available clinical features were downloaded from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database. Then, multiple machine learning algorithms were applied to develop and validate a diagnostic signature by comparing cHL with normal control. In addition, we identified prognostic genes and built a prognostic model with them to predict the prognosis for 130 patients with cHL which were treated with first-line treatment (ABVD chemotherapy or an ABVD-like regimen).
resultsA diagnostic prediction signature was constructed and showed high specificity and sensitivity (training cohort: AUC=0.981,95% CI 0.933-0.998, P<0.001, validation cohort: AUC=0.955,95% CI 0.895-0.986, P<0.001). Additionally, nine prognostic genes (LAMP1, STAT1, MMP9, C1QB, ICAM1, CD274, CCL19, HCK and LILRB2) were screened and a prognostic prediction model was constructed with them, which had been confirmed effectively predicting prognosis (P<0.001). Furthermore, the results of the immune infiltration assessment indicated that the high scale of the fraction of CD8 + T cells, M1 macrophages, resting mast cells associated with an adverse outcome in cHL, and naive B cells related to prolonged survival. In addition, a nomogram that combined the prognostic prediction model and clinical characteristics is also suggested to have a good predictive value for the prognosis of patients.
conclusionThe new markers found in this study may be helpful for the diagnosis and prediction of the prognosis of cHL.
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.