Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40367095›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Advancing patient care: Machine learning models for predicting grade 3+ toxicities in gynecologic cancer patients treated with HDR brachytherapy.

Andres Portocarrero-Bonifaz, Salman Syed, Maxwell Kassel, Grant W McKenzie, Vishwa M Shah, Bryce M Forry, Jeremy T Gaskins, Keith T Sowards, Thulasi Babitha Avula, Adrianna Masters and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Systematic review of artificial intelligence in brachytherapy.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2026
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Andres Portocarrero-BonifazDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5928-3020
Salman SyedDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky, United States of America.
Maxwell KasselDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky, United States of America.
Grant W McKenzieDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky, United States of America.
Vishwa M ShahDivision of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Loma Linda University Medical Center, Loma Linda, California, United States of America.
Bryce M ForryDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky, United States of America.
Jeremy T GaskinsDepartment of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, University of Louisville School of Public Health and Information Sciences, Louisville, Kentucky, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-6284-3404
Keith T SowardsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky, United States of America.ORCID 0009-0000-0852-1976
Thulasi Babitha AvulaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky, United States of America.
Adrianna MastersDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky, United States of America.
Jose G SchneiderDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, United States of America.
Scott R SilvaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-6028-3685

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

BrachytherapyGenital Neoplasms, FemaleMachine LearningAdultAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedRadiotherapy DosageRetrospective StudiesSupport Vector Machine

Identifiers

PMID40367095
PMCPMC12077677

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.