ArticleScientific reports2025
Machine learning for early prediction of secondary cancer after radiotherapy.
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 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.
- Radiation-induced meningiomas: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 927 meningiomas.Surgical neurology international · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Secondary cancers (SCs) following radiotherapy (RT) represent a significant long-term risk of cancer survivors, necessitating accurate predictive models for early intervention. This study developed a machine learning (ML) model integrating clinical, pathological, and genomic data to predict SC incidence. The model leverages a dataset of 1,240 patients from population-based registries and clinical cohorts, incorporating features such as radiation dose, age at exposure, histology, and mutations (e.g., TP53, BRCA1/2). A Random Forest (RF) regression achieved perfect performance metrics (MSE = 0.002, [Formula: see text]-squared = 0.98), with radiation dose (Gini importance = 0.42) and age at exposure (Gini importance = 0.38) identified as the most critical predictors. Predicted incidence rates for new patients, such as 15.2 per 10,000 for breast-to-lung SCs, are consistent with epidemiological trends. The model's impressive performance highlights its potential for accurately predicting SC, underscoring its utility in clinical settings for early detection and predictions for new patients. This study highlights the potential of ML in personalized oncology while emphasizing caution in interpreting overly optimistic metrics.
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.