ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2025
A stacking ensemble framework integrating radiomics and deep learning for prognostic prediction in head and neck cancer.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiomics Using Fused PET and CT Data for Prognostic and Diagnostic Modeling in Head and Neck Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Review
- Article
- Integration of multi-scale radiomics and deep learning for Ki-67 prediction in clear cell renal carcinoma.NPJ precision oncology · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRadiomics models frequently face challenges related to reproducibility and robustness. To address these issues, we propose a multimodal, multi-model fusion framework utilizing stacking ensemble learning for prognostic prediction in head and neck cancer (HNC). This approach seeks to improve the accuracy and reliability of survival predictions.
methodsA total of 806 cases from nine centers were collected; 143 cases from two centers were assigned as the external validation cohort, while the remaining 663 were stratified and randomly split into training (n = 530) and internal validation (n = 133) sets. Radiomics features were extracted according to IBSI standards, and deep learning features were obtained using a 3D DenseNet-121 model. Following feature selection, the selected features were input into Cox, SVM, RSF, DeepCox, and DeepSurv models. A stacking fusion strategy was employed to develop the prognostic model. Model performance was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and time-dependent ROC curves.
resultsOn the external validation set, the model using combined PET and CT radiomics features achieved superior performance compared to single-modality models, with the RSF model obtaining the highest concordance index (C-index) of 0.7302. When using deep features extracted by 3D DenseNet-121, the PET + CT-based models demonstrated significantly improved prognostic accuracy, with Deepsurv and DeepCox achieving C-indices of 0.9217 and 0.9208, respectively. In stacking models, the PET + CT model using only radiomics features reached a C-index of 0.7324, while the deep feature-based stacking model achieved 0.9319. The best performance was obtained by the multi-feature fusion model, which integrated both radiomics and deep learning features from PET and CT, yielding a C-index of 0.9345. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis further confirmed the fusion model's ability to distinguish between high-risk and low-risk groups.
conclusionThe stacking-based ensemble model demonstrates superior performance compared to individual machine learning models, markedly improving the robustness of prognostic predictions.
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.