ArticleCancer medicine2024
Machine Learning Models to Predict Bone Metastasis Risk in Patients With Lung Cancer.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- "First, do no harm" in the digital era: examining the practicality of the European Health Data Space proposal and ethical implications of artificial intelligence: A systematic literature review.BMC medical ethics · 2026Pooled it
- A highly interpretable machine learning model for predicting lung cancer bone metastasis: uncovering the synergistic effect of routine biochemical markers.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Article
- Predictive performance of image processing techniques in the diagnosis of bone metastasis: A meta-analysis of a confusion matrix.Oncology letters · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Bone Metastasis Management: A Narrative Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Review
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
introductionThe aim of this study was to find the most appropriate variables to input into machine learning algorithms to identify those patients with primary lung malignancy with high risk for metastasis to the bone. PATIENT INCLUSION: Patients with either histological or radiological diagnoses of lung cancer were included in this study.
resultsThe patient cohort comprised 1864 patients diagnosed from 2016 to 2021. A total of 25 variables were considered as potential risk factors. These variables have been identified in previous studies as independent risk factors for bone metastasis. Treatment methods for lung cancer were taken into account during model development. The outcome variable was binary, (presence or absence of bone metastasis) with follow-up until death or 12-month survival, whichever is the sooner. Results showed that American Joint Committee on Cancer staging, the use of EGFR inhibitor, age, T-staging, and lymphovascular invasion were the five input features contributing the most to the model algorithm. High AJCC staging (OR 1.98; p < 0.05), the use of EGFR inhibitor (OR 6.14; p < 0.05), high T-staging (OR 1.47; p < 0.05), and the presence of lymphovascular invasion (OR 4.92; p < 0.05) increase predicted risk of bone metastasis. Conversely, older age reduces predicted bone metastasis risk (OR 0.98; p < 0.05).
conclusionThe machine learning model developed in this study can be easily incorporated into the hospital's Clinical Management System so that input variables can be immediately utilized to give an accurate prediction of bone metastatic risk, therefore informing clinicians on the best treatment strategy for that individual patient.
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.