ArticleComputational and mathematical methods in medicine2022
Construction of a Colorectal Cancer Prognostic Risk Model and Screening of Prognostic Risk Genes Using Machine-Learning Algorithms.
Article in Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Novel molecular mechanisms of immune evasion in hepatocellular carcinoma: NSUN2-mediated increase of SOAT2 RNA methylation.Cancer communications (London, England) · 2025Article
- Nanocrystalline cellulose-geniposide complex enhances gut-brain axis modulation for depression treatment.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Targeting B4GALT3 in BMSCs-EVs for Therapeutic Control of HCC via NF-κB pathway inhibition.Cell biology and toxicology · 2025Article
- NGR-Modified CAF-Derived exos Targeting Tumor Vasculature to Induce Ferroptosis and Overcome Chemoresistance in Osteosarcoma.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Esketamine reduces postoperative depression in breast cancer through TREK-1 channel inhibition and neurotransmitter modulation.Cancer cell international · 2025Article
- Analyses of the roles and potential targets of m7G-related genes in colorectal cancer using single-cell and bulk RNA sequencing data.PloS one · 2025Article
- Mechanistic insights into sevoflurane-induced hippocampal neuronal damage and cognitive dysfunction through the NEAT1/Nrf2 signaling axis in aged rats.Cell biology and toxicology · 2024Article
- New perspectives on YTHDF2 O-GlcNAc modification in the pathogenesis of intervertebral disc degeneration.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Gradient boosting reveals spatially diverse cholesterol gene signatures in colon cancer.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
- Clusterin Expression in Colorectal Carcinomas.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study is aimed at constructing a prognostic risk model for colorectal cancer (CRC) using machine-learning algorithms to provide accurate staging and screening of credible prognostic risk genes. We extracted CRC data from GSE126092 and GSE156355 of the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database and datasets from TCGA to analyze the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) using bioinformatics analysis. Among the 330 shared DEGs related to CRC prognosis, we divided the analysis period into different phases and applied univariate COX regression, LASSO, and multivariate COX regression analysis. GO analysis and KEGG analysis revealed that the functions of these DEGs were primarily focused on cell cycle, DNA replication, cell mitosis, and other related functions, and this confirmed our results from a biological perspective. Finally, a prognostic risk model for CRC based on the CHGA, CLU, PLK1, AXIN2, NR3C2, IL17RB, GCG, and AJUBA genes was constructed, and the risk score enabled us to predict the prognosis for CRC. To obtain a comprehensive and accurate model, we used both internal and external evaluations, and the model was able to correctly differentiate patients with CRC into a high-risk group with poor prognosis and a low-risk group with good prognosis. The AUC values of the 3-, 5-, and 10-year survival ROC curves were 0.715, 0.721, and 0.777, respectively, according to the internal evaluation, and the AUC values were 0.606, 0.698, and 0.608, respectively, for the external evaluation using GSE39582 from the GEO database. We determined that CLU, PLK1, and IL17RB could be considered to be independent prognostic factors for CRC with significantly different expression (
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.