ArticleFrontiers in surgery2022
Practice of the new supervised machine learning predictive analytics for glioma patient survival after tumor resection: Experiences in a high-volume Chinese center.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Role of artificial intelligence in cancer detection using protein p53: A Review.Molecular biology reports · 2024Review
- Deep learning in precision medicine and focus on glioma.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2023Review
- Cuproptosis-related risk score based on machine learning algorithm predicts prognosis and characterizes tumor microenvironment in head and neck squamous carcinomas.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to assess the effectiveness of the Gradient Boosting (GB) algorithm on glioma prognosis prediction and to explore new predictive models for glioma patient survival after tumor resection. Methods: A cohort of 776 glioma cases (WHO grades II-IV) between 2010 and 2017 was obtained. Clinical characteristics and biomarker information were reviewed. Subsequently, we constructed the conventional Cox survival model and three different supervised machine learning models, including support vector machine (SVM), random survival forest (RSF), Tree GB, and Component GB. Then, the model performance was compared with each other. At last, we also assessed the feature importance of models. Results: The concordance indexes of the conventional survival model, SVM, RSF, Tree GB, and Component GB were 0.755, 0.787, 0.830, 0.837, and 0.840, respectively. All areas under the cumulative receiver operating characteristic curve of both GB models were above 0.800 at different survival times. Their calibration curves showed good calibration of survival prediction. Meanwhile, the analysis of feature importance revealed Karnofsky performance status, age, tumor subtype, extent of resection, and so on as crucial predictive factors. Conclusion: Gradient Boosting models performed better in predicting glioma patient survival after tumor resection than other models.
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.