ArticlePloS one2025
Advancing patient care: Machine learning models for predicting grade 3+ toxicities in gynecologic cancer patients treated with HDR brachytherapy.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Systematic review of artificial intelligence in brachytherapy.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGynecological cancers are among the most prevalent cancers in women worldwide. Brachytherapy, often used as a boost to external beam radiotherapy, is integral to treatment. Advances in computation, algorithms, and data availability have popularized the use of machine learning to predict patient outcomes. Recent studies have applied models such as logistic regression, support vector machines, and deep learning networks to predict specific toxicities in patients who have undergone brachytherapy.
objectiveTo develop and compare machine learning models for predicting grade 3 or higher toxicities in gynecological cancer patients treated with high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy, aiming to contribute to personalized radiation treatments.
methodsA retrospective analysis was performed on gynecological cancer patients who underwent HDR brachytherapy with Syed-Neblett or Tandem and Ovoid applicators from 2009 to 2023. After applying exclusion criteria, 233 patients were included in the analysis. Dosimetric variables for the high-risk clinical target volume (HR-CTV) and organs at risk, along with tumor, patient, and toxicity data, were collected and compared between groups with and without grade 3 or higher toxicities using statistical tests. Seven supervised classification machine learning models (Logistic Regression, Random Forest, K-Nearest Neighbors, Support Vector Machines, Gaussian Naive Bayes, Multi-Layer Perceptron Neural Networks, and XGBoost) were constructed and evaluated. The training process involved sequential feature selection (SFS) when appropriate, followed by hyperparameter tuning. Final model performance was characterized using a 25% withheld test dataset.
resultsThe top three ranking models were Support Vector Machines, Random Forest, and Logistic Regression, with F1 testing scores of 0.63, 0.57, and 0.52; normMCC testing scores of 0.75, 0.77, and 0.71; and accuracy testing scores of 0.80, 0.85, and 0.81, respectively. The SFS algorithm selected 10 features for the highest-ranking model. In traditional statistical analysis, HR-CTV volume, Charlson Comorbidity Index, Length of Follow-Up, and D2cc - Rectum differed significantly between groups with and without grade 3 or higher toxicities.
conclusionsMachine learning models were developed to predict grade 3 or higher toxicities, achieving satisfactory performance. Machine learning presents a novel solution to creating multivariable models for personalized radiation therapy.
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.