ArticleExperimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.)2023
Artificial neural network-based diagnostic models for lung cancer combining conventional indicators with tumor markers.
Article in Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting lung cancer stage at diagnosis based on self-reported symptoms and background factors using machine learning models.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Autoantibodies combined with systemic inflammation markers for predicting bone metastases in non-small cell lung cancer patients.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Mediating effect of dyadic coping between family function and meaning in life in patients with advanced lung cancer.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- Identification of biomarkers for knee osteoarthritis through clinical data and machine learning models.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting lung cancer based on acoustic-clinical features.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Combined inflammatory-lipid index and tumor markers for predicting the spatial localization of lesions in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Imaging features and clinical markers for predicting postoperative recurrence in early-stage lung cancer.American journal of cancer research · 2025Article
- Utility of four machine learning approaches for identifying ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Identification of a novel necroptosis-related LncRNA signature for prognostic prediction and immune response in oral squamous cell carcinoma.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2024Article
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 set out to establish a lung cancer diagnosis and prediction model uses conventional laboratory indicators combined with tumor markers, so as to help early screening and auxiliary diagnosis of lung cancer through a convenient, fast, and cheap way, and improve the early diagnosis rate of lung cancer. A total of 221 patients with lung cancer, 100 patients with benign pulmonary diseases, and 184 healthy subjects were retrospectively studied. General clinical data, the results of conventional laboratory indicators, and tumor markers were collected. Statistical Product and Service Solutions 26.0 was used for data analysis. The diagnosis and prediction model of lung cancer was established by artificial neural network - multilayer perceptron. After correlation and difference analysis, five comparison groups (lung cancer-benign lung disease group, lung cancer-health group, benign lung disease-health group, early-stage lung cancer-benign lung disease group, and early-stage lung cancer-health group) obtained 5, 28, 25, 16, and 25 valuable indicators for predicting lung cancer or benign lung disease, and then established five diagnostic prediction models, respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) of each combined diagnostic prediction model (0.848, 0.989, 0.949, 0.841, and 0.976) was higher than that of the diagnostic prediction model established only using tumor markers (0.799, 0.941, 0.830, 0.661, and 0.850), and the difference in the lung cancer-health group, the benign lung disease-health group, the early-stage lung cancer-benign lung disease group, and early-stage lung cancer-health group was statistically significant (
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.