ArticleCancer informatics2024
Machine Learning for Dynamic Prognostication of Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Time-Series Data: Survival Path Versus Dynamic-DeepHit HCC Model.
Article in Cancer informatics, 2024. 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.
- Multimodal data-driven prediction of postoperative recurrence and survival in hepatocellular carcinoma: a narrative review.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Review
- Predicting ICU mortality in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm: a nomogram based on MIMIC-IV and eICU-CRD.International journal of medical sciences · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Patients with intermediate or advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) require repeated disease monitoring, prognosis assessment and treatment planning. In 2018, a novel machine learning methodology "survival path" (SP) was developed to facilitate dynamic prognosis prediction and treatment planning. One year after, a deep learning approach called Dynamic Deephit was developed. The performance of the two state-of-art models in dynamic prognostication have not been compared. Methods: We trained and tested the SP and Dynamic DeepHit models in a large cohort of 2511 HCC patients using time-series data. The time-series data were converted into data of time slices, with an interval of three months. The time-dependent c-index for OS at given prediction time ( Results: The comparison between SP model and Dynamic DeepHit-HCC model showed the latter had significant better performance at the time of initial admission. The time-dependent c-index of Dynamic DeepHit-HCC model gradually decreased with the extension of time (from 0.756 to 0.639 in the training set; from 0.787 to 0.661 in internal testing set; from 0.725 to 0.668 in multicenter testing set); while the time-dependent c-index of SP model displayed an increased trend (from 0.665 to 0.748 in the training set; from 0.608 to 0.743 in internal testing set; from 0.643 to 0.720 in multicenter testing set). When the prediction time comes to 6 months or later since initial treatment, the survival path model outperformed the dynamic DeepHit model at late evaluation times (∆ Conclusions: This research highlighted the unique strengths of both models. The SP model had advantage in long term prediction while the Dynamic DeepHit-HCC model had advantages in prediction at near time points. Fine selection of models is needed in dealing with different scenarios.
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.