ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2026
Predicting liver metastasis in colorectal cancer patients using routine biochemical tests enhanced by machine learning.
Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- High Concordance Between GPT-4o and Multidisciplinary Tumor Board Decisions in Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Decision Support Analysis.Journal of medical systems · 2025Article
- Potassium-competitive acid blocker has more negative impacts on clinical outcomes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with checkpoint inhibitors than those of proton pump inhibitors.International journal of clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Dissecting component-specific and sustained benefits of integrated psychosocial-nutritional care in gastric oncology.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLiver is the most common metastatic site in colorectal cancer. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of different machine learning (ML) models in predicting liver metastasis in CRC patients using routine biochemical tests. PATIENTS AND
methodsCross-sectional study employed various ML algorithms for predictive modeling. The study was conducted at two academic reference centers in Ankara, Turkey: a total of 810 CRC patients diagnosed between January 2010 and December 2023 were included. The training and internal validation dataset comprised 710, and external validation dataset included 100 patients. Inclusion criteria were patients aged ≥ 18 years with a pathological CRC diagnosis, pre-treatment biochemical tests, and known initial staging. Exclusion criteria encompassed non-adenocarcinoma histologies, incomplete biochemical data, other malignancies.
resultsLogistic regression achieved the highest internal validation AUC (0.956), accuracy (0.901), and F1 score (0.936), with a sensitivity of 0.971 and specificity of 0.703. ElasticNet and Lasso regression followed closely with AUCs of 0.958. In external validation, logistic regression maintained high performance (AUC 0.951, accuracy 0.900), while the K-nearest neighbors (KNN) model achieved perfect sensitivity (1.0) with an AUC of 0.891. The optimal predictor combination included ALP, LDH, CEA, and CA-19-9.
conclusionDifferent ML models, can effectively predict liver metastasis in CRC patients using routine biochemical tests. Further refinement and prospective clinical trials are necessary to validate and implement these predictive tools in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40676388What 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.