ArticleBMC cancer2025
Enhancing prediction and stratifying risk: machine learning and bayesian-learning models for catheter-related thrombosis in chemotherapy patients.
Article in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning-based prediction of peripherally inserted central catheter-related thrombosis in hematological malignancies: development and validation of a dynamic model in a multicenter cohort.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Early catheter-related thrombosis in oncology patients with central venous access devices: a narrative review of incidence, mechanisms and clinical implications.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Review
- Machine Learning Model Predicts New-Onset Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis After Pelvic Fracture Surgery and Targeted Diagnosis.Clinical epidemiology · 2026Article
- Risk factors and predictive model of lymph node metastasis in clinical stage IA peripheral non-small cell lung cancer: a retrospective study.BMC cancer · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCatheter-related thrombosis (CRT) is a serious complication in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, yet existing risk prediction models demonstrate limited accuracy. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of machine learning (ML) and Bayesian-learning models for CRT prediction in a large cohort of breast cancer patients undergoing catheterization.
methodsA total of 3337 breast cancer patients with central venous catheters (Cohort 1) were included to develop and test ML models. Given the suboptimal clinical feasibility of ML models, the Bayesian-learning model was constructed using odds ratio analysis and Gaussian distribution. The hazard ratio for the high-risk and low-risk groups was calculated using Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, and the model was validated in an independent cohort of 1274 patients (Cohort 2).
resultsIn Cohort 1, 246 patients (7.37%) developed CRT. Among the eight ML algorithms tested, WeightedEnsemble model exhibited relatively stable performance, achieving area under the receiver operating characteristic curves of 0.89 in the training set and 0.69 in the test set. WeightedEnsemble improved generalization by integrating multiple base models. The odds ratio analysis and Bayesian-learning modeling identified 4 independent risk factors: hemoglobin (threshold point [TP]: 134.63 g/L), activated partial thromboplastin time (TP: 31.71 s), total cholesterol (TP: 11.19 mmol/L), and catheterization approach (TP: peripherally inserted central catheters). A simplified risk stratification system was developed, categorizing patients into low-risk (0-1 factors) and high-risk (2-4 factors) groups. This system exhibited strong CRT risk discriminative ability, as confirmed through survival analysis (P < 0.001 in both cohorts). In Cohort 1, cox regression analysis showed that the high-risk group had hazard ratio (HR) of 1.60 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-2.22) for both catheter indwelling time and catheter use duration. In Cohort 2, the system maintained stable discriminative ability, with an HR of 5.63 (95% CI, 3.46-9.21) for catheter indwelling time and 5.62 (95% CI, 3.46-9.12) for catheter use duration.
conclusionsWhile ML models demonstrated high predictive performance, their clinical applicability was limited due to complexity. The Bayesian-learning-based risk stratification model provided a simplified yet robust alternative, effectively predicting CRT risk and offering a clinically feasible tool for risk assessment in breast cancer patients with chemotherapy. Further validation in diverse cancer populations is warranted to refine its generalizability.
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.