ArticleInternational journal of surgery (London, England)2025
A nomogram for predicting the diagnosis of central malignant tumors based on preoperative clinical characteristics and laboratory indicators: a diagnostic study.
Article in International journal of surgery (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to develop a nomogram to predict the preoperative diagnostic probabilities of central lymphoma and glioma, as well as glioblastoma versus non-glioblastoma. PATIENTS AND
methodsRetrospective analysis was performed on patients with central nervous system lymphoma or glioma who received treatment at our department, between 2016 and 2025. From 2016 to 2024, Eligible patients were randomly assigned to training and validation sets in a 7:3 ratio. Patients at our department from 2024 to 2025 ( n = 104) and two other medical centers (External Center1: n = 95, External Center2: n = 123) will be included as prospective external validation cohorts. Key variables for nomogram construction were identified through the integration of least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and multivariate logistic regression analysis. To assess the performance of the nomogram, seven machine learning models were constructed, including logistic regression, decision tree, random forest, support vector machine (SVM), neural network, Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), and Light Gradient Boosting Machine (lightGBM), which were then evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and decision curve analysis. The validation set was used for further model evaluation.
resultsThis retrospective study included 712 cases: 127 patients with newly diagnosed primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) and 586 patients with newly diagnosed glioma. In the diagnostic model for PCNSL versus glioma, the following five risk factors were included: age, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), neutrophil count (NEUT), neutrophil ratio (NEUT1), and monocyte count (MONO). The area under the curve (AUC) for the seven models ranged from 0.784 to 0.889, and the optimal AUC values obtained from the external validation sets at our center (2024-2025) and two other medical centers were 0.877, 0.716, and 0.743, respectively. In the diagnostic model for glioblastoma versus non-glioblastoma, three risk factors were included: age, neutrophil ratio (NEUT1), and monocyte count (MONO). The AUC for the seven models ranged from 0.778 to 0.857, while the optimal AUC values obtained from the external validation sets at our center (2024-2025) and two other medical centers were 0.861, 0.842, and 0.710.
conclusionThis study developed and validated diagnostic probability models for central lymphoma versus glioma, and glioblastoma versus non-glioblastoma. These models may assist clinicians in determining the type of central malignant tumor affecting patients, thereby facilitating the development of more personalized and optimized treatment strategies.
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.