ArticleBMJ open2025
Development and validation of an interpretable machine learning model for predicting Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukaemia using clinical and laboratory parameters: a single-centre retrospective study.
Article in BMJ open, 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.
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
objectiveTo develop and validate a prediction model of Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (Ph+ALL).
designA single-centre retrospective study.
participantsThis study analysed 471 newly diagnosed patients with ALL at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University from January 2014 to December 2023.
methodsClinical and laboratory parameters were collected, and the important characteristic parameters were selected using BorutaShap. Multiple machine learning (ML) models were constructed and optimised by using the active learning (AL) algorithm. Performance was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC), comprehensive indicators and decision curve analysis. The interpretability of the model was evaluated by using SHapley Additive Interpretation (SHAP), and external validation was conducted on an independent test cohort.
results10 parameters were selected to construct multiple ML models. The CatBoost model integrated with an AL algorithm (CatBoost-AL) was found to be the most effective model for predicting Ph+ALL within the validation data set. This model achieved an AUC of 0.797 (95% CI 0.710 to 0.884), along with sensitivity, specificity and F1 score of 0.667, 0.864 and 0.777, respectively. The prediction performance of CatBoost-AL was further validated with an external testing set, where it maintained a strong AUC of 0.794 (95% CI 0.707 to 0.881). Using SHAP for global interpretability analysis, age, monocyte count, γ-glutamyl transferase, neutrophil count and alanine aminotransferase were identified as crucial parameters that significantly influence the diagnostic accuracy of CatBoost-AL.
conclusionAn interpretable ML model and online prediction tool were developed to determine whether newly diagnosed patients with ALL are Ph+ALL. The key parameters identified by the optimal model provided a further understanding of Ph+ALL characteristics and were valuable for accurate diagnosis and treatment of Ph+ALL.
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.