ArticleScientific reports2025
A nomogram and random forest model for predicting liver metastasis in patients with early-onset colorectal cancer.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Multimodal prediction of metachronous liver metastasis in stage I-III colorectal cancer patients: multicenter cohort study employing machine learning.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- The Molecular Signature of Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases: Distinct Biology and Clinical Challenges.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- The result prediction of fluorescence in situ hybridization for breast cancer patients based on machine learning and deep learning models: a multicenter study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026Article
- Unveiling the prognostic role of FABP4 in early-onset colorectal cancer through big data analysis and preliminary clinical validation.Frontiers in 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in individuals under the age of 50 has increased. Liver metastasis (LM) is the most common metastasis in CRC patients and is associated with a poor prognosis. This study aimed to use public databases to identify the risk factors for LM in early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC) patients and develop a nomogram to quantify the risk of LM. We retrospectively collected data of EOCRC patients diagnosed from 2010 to 2015 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Univariate and multivariate logistic analysis were used to screen and validate the risk factors for LM in EOCRC patients, and a nomogram was established based on these factors. Calibration curve, area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), and decision curve analysis (DCA) were developed to evaluate the accuracy of the model. A total of 2567 EOCRC patients were included and randomly divided into a training set (n = 1797) and a validation set (n = 770) at a ratio of 7:3. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that N stage, pretreatment CEA, bone metastasis, and lung metastasis were independent risk factors. The AUCs of the training set and validation set were 0.7958 and 0.7653, respectively, and the calibration curve also demonstrated good accuracy and predictive ability. DCA indicated that it was more clinically relevant than the traditional TN staging. We constructed a Random Forest model, and calculated the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values to determine variables importance and visualize the results. We developed a nomogram to predict the risk of LM in EOCRC patients, and the model was internally validated with good accuracy and reliability. It can assist doctors in risk assessment and clinical decision-making.
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.