Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37488275›Full record

SynthesisProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2023

The predictive value of machine learning and nomograms for lymph node metastasis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hao Wang, Zhongyou Xia, Yulai Xu, Jing Sun, Ji Wu

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hao Wang *Department of Urology, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Second Clinical College, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, 637000, Sichuan, China.
Zhongyou Xia *Department of Urology, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Second Clinical College, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, 637000, Sichuan, China.
Yulai XuDepartment of Urology, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Second Clinical College, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, 637000, Sichuan, China.
Jing SunDepartment of Urology, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Second Clinical College, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, 637000, Sichuan, China.
Ji WuDepartment of Urology, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Second Clinical College, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, 637000, Sichuan, China. wuji2168@163.com.ORCID 0009-0006-1547-9159
North Sichuan Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn clinical practice, there are currently a variety of nomograms for predicting lymph node metastasis (LNM) of prostate cancer. At the same time, some scholars have introduced machine learning (ML) into the prediction of LNM of prostate cancer. However, the predictive value of nomograms and ML remains controversial. Based on this situation, this systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to explore the predictive value of various nomograms currently recommended and newly-developed ML models for LNM in prostate cancer patients. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Cochrane, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched up to November 1, 2022. The risk of bias in the included studies was evaluated using the Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). The concordance index (C-index), sensitivity, and specificity were adopted to evaluate the predictive accuracy of the models.

resultsThirty-one studies (18,803 patients) were included. Seven kinds of nomograms currently recommended, dominated by Briganti nomogram or MSKCC nomogram, were covered in the included studies. For newly-developed ML models, the C-index for LNM prediction in the training set and validation set was 0.846 [95%CI (0.818, 0.873)] and 0.862 [95%CI (0.819-0.905)] respectively. Most ML models in the training set were based on Logistic Regression (LR), which had a sensitivity of 0.78 [95%CI (0.70, 0.85)] and a specificity of 0.85 [95%CI (0.77, 0.90)] in the training set, and a sensitivity of 0.81 [95%CI (0.67, 0.89)] and a specificity of 0.82 [95%CI (0.75, 0.88)] in the validation set. For the recommended nomograms, the C-index in the validation set was 0.745 [95%CI (0.701, 0.790)] for the Briganti nomogram and 0.714 [95%CI (0.662, 0.765)] for the MSKCC nomogram.

conclusionThe predictive accuracy of ML is superior to existing clinically recommended nomograms, and appropriate updates can be conducted to existing nomograms according to special situations.

Indexed as

NomogramsProstatic NeoplasmsHumansLymphatic MetastasisMaleRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentROC Curve

Identifiers

PMID37488275
OpenAlexW4385191716

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.