Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39095647›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

A competing risks machine learning study of neutron dose, fractionation, age, and sex effects on mortality in 21,000 mice.

Eric Wang, Igor Shuryak, David J Brenner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

3 authors.

Eric WangCenter for Radiological Research, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, 630 West 168th street, VC-11, New York, NY, 10032, USA. ew2717@cumc.columbia.edu.
Igor ShuryakCenter for Radiological Research, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, 630 West 168th street, VC-11, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
David J BrennerCenter for Radiological Research, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, 630 West 168th street, VC-11, New York, NY, 10032, USA.

Funding

NASA #80NSSC23M0099
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study explores the impact of densely-ionizing radiation on non-cancer and cancer diseases, focusing on dose, fractionation, age, and sex effects. Using historical mortality data from approximately 21,000 mice exposed to fission neutrons, we employed random survival forest (RSF), a powerful machine learning algorithm accommodating nonlinear dependencies and interactions, treating cancer and non-cancer outcomes as competing risks. Unlike traditional parametric models, RSF avoids strict assumptions and captures complex data relationships through decision tree ensembles. SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) values and variable importance scores were employed for interpretation. The findings revealed clear dose-response trends, with cancer being the predominant cause of mortality. SHAP value dose-response shapes differed, showing saturation for cancer hazard at high doses (> 2 Gy) and a more linear pattern at lower doses. Non-cancer responses remained more linear throughout the entire dose range. There was a potential inverse dose rate effect for cancer, while the evidence for non-cancer was less conclusive. Sex and age effects were less pronounced. This investigation, utilizing machine learning, enhances our understanding of the patterns of non-cancer and cancer mortality induced by densely-ionizing radiations, emphasizing the importance of such approaches in radiation research, including space travel and radioprotection.

Indexed as

Machine LearningNeutronsAge FactorsAnimalsDose Fractionation, RadiationDose-Response Relationship, RadiationFemaleMaleMiceNeoplasms, Radiation-InducedSex Factors

Identifiers

PMID39095647
PMCPMC11297256

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.