ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2022
Comparing machine learning algorithms to predict 5-year survival in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- A Framework for Locally Imputing and Predicting Biomarker Trajectories Under Irregular Monitoring: Application to Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.Research square · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence for risk assessment and outcome prediction in malignant haematology.British journal of haematology · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Hematologic Malignancies: Opportunities, Challenges, and Clinical Integration.Cureus · 2026Review
- Acute myeloid leukemia risk stratification in younger and older patients through transcriptomic machine learning models.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Biological Data Resources and Machine Learning Frameworks for Hematology Research.Genomics, proteomics & bioinformatics · 2025Review
- Identification of relevant features using SEQENS to improve supervised machine learning models predicting AML treatment outcome.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Utilization of Machine Learning in the Prediction, Diagnosis, Prognosis, and Management of Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Application of artificial intelligence in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) disease prediction and management: a scoping review.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Based Management of Adult Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: Where Are We and Where Are We Going?Cancers · 2024Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Diagnostic Cytology and Genomic Testing for Hematologic Disorders.Cells · 2023Review
- Predicting the Activity of Oral Lichen Planus with Glycolysis-related Molecules: A Scikit-learn-based Function.Current medical science · 2023Article
- Applications of Machine Learning in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionChronic myeloid leukemia (CML) is a myeloproliferative disorder resulting from the translocation of chromosomes 19 and 22. CML includes 15-20% of all cases of leukemia. Although bone marrow transplant and, more recently, tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) as a first-line treatment have significantly prolonged survival in CML patients, accurate prediction using available patient-level factors can be challenging. We intended to predict 5-year survival among CML patients via eight machine learning (ML) algorithms and compare their performance.
methodsThe data of 837 CML patients were retrospectively extracted and randomly split into training and test segments (70:30 ratio). The outcome variable was 5-year survival with potential values of alive or deceased. The dataset for the full features and important features selected by minimal redundancy maximal relevance (mRMR) feature selection were fed into eight ML techniques, including eXtreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), multilayer perceptron (MLP), pattern recognition network, k-nearest neighborhood (KNN), probabilistic neural network, support vector machine (SVM) (kernel = linear), SVM (kernel = RBF), and J-48. The scikit-learn library in Python was used to implement the models. Finally, the performance of the developed models was measured using some evaluation criteria with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
resultsSpleen palpable, age, and unexplained hemorrhage were identified as the top three effective features affecting CML 5-year survival. The performance of ML models using the selected-features was superior to that of the full-features dataset. Among the eight ML algorithms, SVM (kernel = RBF) had the best performance in tenfold cross-validation with an accuracy of 85.7%, specificity of 85%, sensitivity of 86%, F-measure of 87%, kappa statistic of 86.1%, and area under the curve (AUC) of 85% for the selected-features. Using the full-features dataset yielded an accuracy of 69.7%, specificity of 69.1%, sensitivity of 71.3%, F-measure of 72%, kappa statistic of 75.2%, and AUC of 70.1%.
conclusionsAccurate prediction of the survival likelihood of CML patients can inform caregivers to promote patient prognostication and choose the best possible treatment path. While external validation is required, our developed models will offer customized treatment and may guide the prescription of personalized medicine for CML patients.
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.