ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2024
Machine Learning-Based Survival Prediction Models for Progression-Free and Overall Survival in Advanced-Stage Hodgkin Lymphoma.
Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Explainable Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Progression-Free Survival in Prostate Cancer: Retrospective Cohort Study.JMIR cancer · 2026Article
- Validation of the advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma international prognostic index (A-HIPI) in the GHSG HD21 trial.HemaSphere · 2026Article
- Prognostic Impact of Extranodal Organ Burden in Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma with Extranodal Involvement: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Predicting survival of Hodgkin lymphoma using machine learning-an analysis based on the SEER database.Annals of hematology · 2026Article
- Machine learning enhances risk stratification and treatment failure prediction in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.HemaSphere · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence for risk assessment and outcome prediction in malignant haematology.British journal of haematology · 2026Review
- Refining the risk stratification in advanced-stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma: A critical analysis of clinical prediction models.British journal of haematology · 2025Review
- An Individualized Prediction Model for Early-Stage Classic Hodgkin's Lymphoma.NEJM evidence · 2025Article
- Newly Diagnosed Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma: Optimizing Outcomes in a New Therapeutic Era.Hematological oncology · 2025Review
- Development of time to event prediction models using federated learning.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- The A-HIPI prediction model in advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma: identification of risk groups and creation of an online tool.Blood advances · 2025Article
- External validation and calibration of the HoLISTIC Consortium's advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma international prognostic index (A-HIPI) in the Brazilian Hodgkin lymphoma registry.British journal of haematology · 2025Article
- Hematological Malignancies in Older Patients: Focus on the Potential Role of a Geriatric Assessment Management.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 13 institutions in 11 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposePatients diagnosed with advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma (aHL) have historically been risk-stratified using the International Prognostic Score (IPS). This study investigated if a machine learning (ML) approach could outperform existing models when it comes to predicting overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). PATIENTS AND
methodsThis study used patient data from the Danish National Lymphoma Register for model development (development cohort). The ML model was developed using stacking, which combines several predictive survival models (Cox proportional hazard, flexible parametric model, IPS, principal component, penalized regression) into a single model, and was compared with two versions of IPS (IPS-3 and IPS-7) and the newly developed aHL international prognostic index (A-HIPI). Internal model validation was performed using nested cross-validation, and external validation was performed using patient data from the Swedish Lymphoma Register and Cancer Registry of Norway (validation cohort).
resultsIn total, 707 and 760 patients with aHL were included in the development and validation cohorts, respectively. Examining model performance for OS in the development cohort, the concordance index (C-index) for the ML model, IPS-7, IPS-3, and A-HIPI was found to be 0.789, 0.608, 0.650, and 0.768, respectively. The corresponding estimates in the validation cohort were 0.749, 0.700, 0.663, and 0.741. For PFS, the ML model achieved the highest C-index in both cohorts (0.665 in the development cohort and 0.691 in the validation cohort). The time-varying AUCs for both the ML model and the A-HIPI were consistently higher in both cohorts compared with the IPS models within the first 5 years after diagnosis.
conclusionThe new prognostic model for aHL on the basis of ML techniques demonstrated a substantial improvement compared with the IPS models, but yielded a limited improvement in predictive performance compared with the A-HIPI.
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.