ArticleScientific reports2023
Survival prediction and prognostic factors in colorectal cancer after curative surgery: insights from cox regression and neural networks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting mortality and recurrence in colorectal cancer: Comparative assessment of predictive models.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Application value of laparoscopic surgery in elderly patients (≥ 75 years) with colorectal cancer and prognostic factors influencing 5-year overall survival.American journal of translational research · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medical research frequently relies on Cox regression to analyze the survival distribution of cancer patients. Nonetheless, in specific scenarios, neural networks hold the potential to serve as a robust alternative. In this study, we aim to scrutinize the effectiveness of Cox regression and neural network models in assessing the survival outcomes of patients who have undergone treatment for colorectal cancer. We conducted a retrospective study on 284 colorectal cancer patients who underwent surgery at Imam Khomeini clinic in Hamadan between 2001 and 2017. The data was used to train both Cox regression and neural network models, and their predictive accuracy was compared using diagnostic measures such as sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, accuracy, negative predictive value, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. The analyses were performed using STATA 17 and R4.0.4 software. The study revealed that the best neural network model had a sensitivity of 74.5% (95% CI 61.0-85.0), specificity of 83.3% (65.3-94.4), positive predictive value of 89.1% (76.4-96.4), negative predictive value of 64.1% (47.2-78.8), AUC of 0.79 (0.70-0.88), and accuracy of 0.776 for death prediction. For recurrence, the best neural network model had a sensitivity of 88.1% (74.4-96.0%), specificity of 83.7% (69.3-93.2%), positive predictive value of 84.1% (69.9-93.4%), negative predictive value of 87.8% (73.8-95.9%), AUC of 0.86 (0.78-0.93), and accuracy of 0.859. The Cox model had comparable results, with a sensitivity of 73.6% (64.8-81.2) and 85.5% (78.3-91.0), specificity of 89.6% (83.8-93.8) and 98.0% (94.4-99.6), positive predictive value of 84.0% (75.6-90.4) and 97.4% (92.6-99.5), negative predictive value of 82.0% (75.6-90.4) and 88.8% (0.83-93.1), AUC of 0.82 (0.77-0.86) and 0.92 (0.89-0.95), and accuracy of 0.88 and 0.92 for death and recurrence prediction, respectively. In conclusion, the study found that both Cox regression and neural network models are effective in predicting early recurrence and death in patients with colorectal cancer after curative surgery. The neural network model showed slightly better sensitivity and negative predictive value for death, while the Cox model had better specificity and positive predictive value for recurrence. Overall, both models demonstrated high accuracy and AUC, indicating their usefulness in predicting these outcomes.
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.