ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal oncology2024
Prognostic prediction models for postoperative patients with stage I to III colorectal cancer based on machine learning.
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 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.
- Identify MTDH as a Key Gene of Radio-Resistance in Colorectal Cancer Based on Multi-Omics and Experimental Validation.Oncology research · 2026Article
- Constructing a Prognostic Model for Subtypes of Colorectal Cancer Based on Machine Learning and Immune Infiltration-Related Genes.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is characterized by high heterogeneity, aggressiveness, and high morbidity and mortality rates. With machine learning (ML) algorithms, patient, tumor, and treatment features can be used to develop and validate models for predicting survival. In addition, important variables can be screened and different applications can be provided that could serve as vital references when making clinical decisions and potentially improving patient outcomes in clinical settings.
aimTo construct prognostic prediction models and screen important variables for patients with stage I to III CRC.
methodsMore than 1000 postoperative CRC patients were grouped according to survival time (with cutoff values of 3 years and 5 years) and assigned to training and testing cohorts (7:3). For each 3-category survival time, predictions were made by 4 ML algorithms (all-variable and important variable-only datasets), each of which was validated
resultsOur ML models performed well; the model performance before and after important parameter identification was consistent, and variable screening was effective. The highest pre- and postscreening model AUCs 95% confidence intervals in the testing set were 0.87 (0.81-0.92) and 0.89 (0.84-0.93) for overall survival, 0.75 (0.69-0.82) and 0.73 (0.64-0.81) for disease-free survival, 0.95 (0.88-1.00) and 0.88 (0.75-0.97) for recurrence-free survival, and 0.76 (0.47-0.95) and 0.80 (0.53-0.94) for distant metastasis-free survival. Repeated cross-validation and bootstrap validation were performed in both the training and testing datasets. The SHAP values of the important variables were consistent with the clinicopathological characteristics of patients with tumors. The nomograms were created.
conclusionWe constructed a comprehensive, high-accuracy, important variable-based ML architecture for predicting the 3-category survival times. This architecture could serve as a vital reference for managing CRC patients.
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.