Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36914697›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Predicting metastasis in gastric cancer patients: machine learning-based approaches.

Atefeh Talebi, Carlos A Celis-Morales, Nasrin Borumandnia, Somayeh Abbasi, Mohamad Amin Pourhoseingholi, Abolfazl Akbari, Javad Yousefi

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldFull text read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Research progress of machine learning applications in gastric cancer diagnosis and therapy.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Atefeh TalebiColorectal Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Carlos A Celis-MoralesBritish Heart Foundation Cardiovascular Research Centre, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Nasrin BorumandniaUrology and Nephrology Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. borumand.n@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7583-8313
Somayeh AbbasiDepartment of Mathematics, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
Mohamad Amin PourhoseingholiGastroenterology and Liver Diseases Research Center, Research Institute for Gastroenterology and Liver Diseases, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Abolfazl AkbariColorectal Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Javad YousefiDepartment of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Iran University of Medical Sciences · IRBritish Heart Foundation · GBIslamic Azad University, Isfahan · IRShahid Beheshti University · IRShahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gastric cancer (GC), with a 5-year survival rate of less than 40%, is known as the fourth principal reason of cancer-related mortality over the world. This study aims to develop predictive models using different machine learning (ML) classifiers based on both demographic and clinical variables to predict metastasis status of patients with GC. The data applied in this study including 733 of GC patients, divided into a train and test groups at a ratio of 8:2, diagnosed at Taleghani tertiary hospital. In order to predict metastasis in GC, ML-based algorithms, including Naive Bayes (NB), Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Neural Network (NN), Decision Tree (RT) and Logistic Regression (LR), with 5-fold cross validation were performed. To assess the model performance, F1 score, precision, sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and precision-recall AUC (PR-AUC) were obtained. 262 (36%) experienced metastasis among 733 patients with GC. Although all models have optimal performance, the indices of SVM model seems to be more appropiate (training set: AUC: 0.94, Sensitivity: 0.94; testing set: AUC: 0.85, Sensitivity: 0.92). Then, NN has the higher AUC among ML approaches (training set: AUC: 0.98; testing set: AUC: 0.86). The RF of ML-based models, which determine size of tumor and age as two essential variables, is considered as the third efficient model, because of higher specificity and AUC (84% and 87%). Based on the demographic and clinical characteristics, ML approaches can predict the metastasis status in GC patients. According to AUC, sensitivity and specificity in both SVM and NN can be regarded as better algorithms among 6 applied ML-based methods.

Indexed as

Stomach NeoplasmsAlgorithmsBayes TheoremHumansMachine LearningNeural Networks, Computer

Identifiers

PMID36914697
PMCPMC10011363
OpenAlexW4324130145

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
reference markers read4
measurements read12
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.