ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Development and Validation of a Machine Learning-Based Predictive Model for Postoperative Frailty in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Its Relation to Early Recovery.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2025. 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.
- Comment on Development and Validation of a Machine Learning-Based Predictive Model for Postoperative Frailty in Patients with Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer and its Relation to Early Recovery.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in non-small cell lung cancer: transforming diagnosis, treatment, and prognostic evaluation.Frontiers in medicine · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study was designed to evaluate the postoperative frailty status of patients with non-small cell lung cancer, identify influencing factors, establish a machine learning-based prediction model, and explore the correlation between frailty status at 3 months and early recovery at 1 month postoperatively.
methodsThis retrospective analysis included patients with non-small cell lung cancer who underwent surgery at our hospital from 2021 to 2024. Clinical variables, including demographics, tumor characteristics, treatment, and laboratory tests, were analyzed. Feature selection and model construction were performed by using LASSO regression. Cross-validation assessed the accuracy of the models. Frailty at 3 months and quality of recovery at 1 month postoperatively were measured by using the Tilburg Frailty Index and Quality of Recovery (QoR-15) scales, respectively.
resultsA total of 1,013 patients were included. The initial model achieved an AUC of 0.833, accuracy of 0.854, recall of 0.382, and F1 score of 0.502 in the training set, and an AUC of 0.786, accuracy of 0.857, recall of 0.242, and F1 score of 0.364 in the validation set. Of the patients, 190 (18.8%) developed frailty at 3 months postoperatively. After applying Synthetic Minority oversampling Technique to balance the data, the model's performance improved (area under the curve [AUC] 0.850, accuracy 0.791, recall 0.818, and F1 score 0.795 for the training set; AUC 0.819, accuracy 0.778, recall 0.762, and F1 score 0.781 for the test set). Additionally, we developed a nomogram to visually represent the predictive model, enabling clinicians to easily assess frailty risk in individuals based on key factors. Correlation analyses showed that frailty at 3 months was moderately negatively correlated with early recovery at 1 month (correlation coefficient = - 0.370).
conclusionsThis study developed a predictive model of postsurgical frailty in lung cancer, providing insights into personalized patient management and early recovery improvement. Further studies should explore the clinical application of the model.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40366574What 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.