ArticleBMC cancer2025
Early prediction of liver metastasis in pancreatic cancer using routine clinical data: an externally validated machine learning model.
Article in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence and laboratory biomarkers in veterinary medicine: an update about machine learning applications.The veterinary quarterly · 2026Review
- Clinical characteristics and risk factors in patients with colon cancer liver metastases.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLiver metastasis at the time of pancreatic cancer diagnosis plays a critical role in treatment planning owing to its strong association with poor prognosis. However, they often remain undetected because of the limited sensitivity of conventional imaging and biomarkers. Previous studies have primarily focused on postoperative liver metastasis or relied on complex nonroutine variables (e.g., liquid biopsy and radiomics), which limit scalability and real-world applicability. To address this unmet need, we applied an machine learning (ML) approach chosen for its interpretability, developing a simple, real-time prediction model that uses only routine clinical data available at diagnosis.
methodsWe retrospectively enrolled 2,657 patients with pancreatic cancer from a tertiary centre to develop the Liver Metastasis in Pancreatic Cancer (LiMPC) model. The model was trained using 21 routinely available clinical variables and compared across four ML algorithms. The best performing model (extreme gradient boosting) was calibrated using isotonic regression and externally validated in five independent hospitals (n = 272). Model performance was evaluated using AUROC, sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value, and calibration plots. Clinical utility was assessed with decision curve analysis, and feature contributions were interpreted using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP).
resultsThe fine-tuned LiMPC model achieved strong external validation performance (AUROC = 0.78, sensitivity = 0.81, specificity = 0.55) with robust calibration and consistent clinical net benefit. SHAP interpretation identified CA19-9, CEA, GGT, and age as key predictors, consistent with established biomarkers of advanced disease. In the subgroup analysis, the model achieved particularly strong discrimination in older (AUROC = 0.82) and male (AUROC = 0.82) patients, suggesting demographic influences on metastatic risk. In supplementary analyses, baseline predictors remained consistent among patients who later developed liver metastasis, reinforcing the model’s biological plausibility and clinical relevance.
conclusionsLiMPC is an externally validated, interpretable tool for liver metastasis risk stratification using routinely collected clinical data. As a hypothesis-generating tool, it demonstrates how simple clinical variables can provide decision support when imaging results are inconclusive, offering a practical framework for future prospective validation and clinical implementation.
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.