ArticleCancers2024
Machine Learning versus Cox Models for Predicting Overall Survival in Patients with Osteosarcoma: A Retrospective Analysis of the EURAMOS-1 Clinical Trial Data.
Article in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00134030 (A Randomized Trial of the European and American Osteosarcoma Study Group to Optimize Treatment Strategies for Resectable Osteosarcoma Based on Histological Response to Pre-operative Chemotherapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
A Randomized Trial of the European and American Osteosarcoma Study Group to Optimize Treatment Strategies for Resectable Osteosarcoma Based on Histological Response to Pre-operative Chemotherapy
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of a machine learning-based prognostic prediction model and a web-based tool for pediatric hepatoblastoma: a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database study.Pediatric surgery international · 2026Article
- A Unified Framework for Survival Prediction: Combining Machine Learning Feature Selection with Traditional Survival Analysis in Heart Failure and METABRIC Breast Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Machine learning algorithms and web-based prognostic tool for different histological subtypes of osteosarcoma: a retrospective cohort.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the mid-1980s, there has been little progress in improving survival of patients diagnosed with osteosarcoma. Survival prediction models play a key role in clinical decision-making, guiding healthcare professionals in tailoring treatment strategies based on individual patient risks. The increasing interest of the medical community in using machine learning (ML) for predicting survival has sparked an ongoing debate on the value of ML techniques versus more traditional statistical modelling (SM) approaches. This study investigates the use of SM versus ML methods in predicting overall survival (OS) using osteosarcoma data from the EURAMOS-1 clinical trial (NCT00134030). The well-established Cox proportional hazard model is compared to the extended Cox model that includes time-varying effects, and to the ML methods random survival forests and survival neural networks. The impact of eight variables on OS predictions is explored. Results are compared on different model performance metrics, variable importance, and patient-specific predictions. The article provides comprehensive insights to aid healthcare researchers in evaluating diverse survival prediction models for low-dimensional clinical data.
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.