ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2026
Lymph Node Invasion Prediction in Prostate Cancer: A Comparative Machine-Learning Study.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate preoperative prediction of lymph node invasion (LNI) in prostate cancer is critical for guiding lymph node dissection. Current nomograms often fail to optimall balance the risks of missing metastatic cases and unnecessary dissections. Machine-learning models can provide improved predictive performance through more flexible modeling of complex clinical data.
methodsThe authors developed machine-learning models using clinicopathologic features to predict LNI. Due to a significant class imbalance between LNI-positive and LNI-negative cases, a synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) was applied to balance the dataset. Four machine-learning algorithms (k-Nearest Neighbors, Random Forest, Support Vector Machine, and Extreme Gradient Boosting [XGBoost]) were trained using 10-fold cross-validation. Model performance was evaluated using accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis was performed for interpretability.
resultsThe Random Forest model demonstrated the highest predictive performance. Key predictive features included prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density, clinical stage, and presence of the cribriform pattern. Use of SHAP analysis enabled visualization of individual feature contributions. Compared with existing nomograms, Random Forest and XGBoost achieved superior discrimination performance.
conclusionMachine-learning models may outperform traditional nomograms in predicting LNI in prostate cancer, especially when trained on balanced datasets and combined with explainability tools such as SHAP. Further external validation and inclusion of additional features can improve model generalizability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41284205What 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.