ArticleCancers2024
Utility of Machine Learning Models to Predict Lymph Node Metastasis of Japanese Localized Prostate Cancer.
Article in Cancers, 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.
- Lymph Node Invasion Prediction in Prostate Cancer: A Comparative Machine-Learning Study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-driven prediction of lymph node metastasis in T1 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma using whole slide images.NPJ precision oncology · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesExtended pelvic lymph node dissection is a crucial surgical technique for managing intermediate to high-risk prostate cancer. Accurately predicting lymph node metastasis before surgery can minimize unnecessary lymph node dissections and their associated complications. This study assessed the efficacy of various machine learning models for predicting lymph node metastasis in a cohort of Japanese patients who underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.
methodsData from 625 patients who underwent extended pelvic lymph node dissection or standard dissection with lymph node metastasis between October 2010 and February 2023 were analyzed. Four machine learning models-Random Forest, Light Gradient-Boosting Machine, Logistic Regression, and Support Vector Machine-were used to predict lymph node metastasis. Their performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves, a decision curve analysis, and predictive values at different thresholds.
resultsLymph node metastasis was observed in 34 patients (5.4%). The Light Gradient-Boosting Machine had the highest AUC of 0.924, followed by the Random Forest model with an AUC of 0.894. The decision curve analysis indicated substantial net benefits for both models, particularly at low threshold probabilities. The Light Gradient-Boosting Machine demonstrated superior accuracy, achieving 95.6% at the 0.05 threshold and 96.7% at the 0.10 threshold, outperforming other models and conventional nomograms in the validation dataset.
conclusionMachine learning models, especially Light Gradient-Boosting Machine and Random Forest, show significant potential for predicting lymph node metastasis in prostate cancer, thereby aiding in reducing unnecessary surgical interventions.
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.