ArticleRadiation oncology journal2025
Machine learning-based prediction of severe oral mucositis from head and neck cancer radiation therapy.
Article in Radiation oncology journal, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to develop prediction models for severe oral mucositis (OM) (grade ≥ 3) from head and neck cancer (HNC) radiotherapy (RT) using machine learning (ML) techniques and different types of features, including clinical, dose-volume metric, and radiomic features. MATERIALS AND
methodsRetrospective data of 148 HNC RT patients were collected and randomly divided into 80% training and 20% test datasets. Sixteen combinations of feature selection and classification algorithms were used for modeling with different combinations of feature types. The model performance was evaluated using a confusion matrix and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). The difference in the error rates obtained from any pair of modeling approaches were evaluated with McNemar's test.
resultsThe best-performing model was based on the random forest classifier and minimum redundancy maximum relevance feature selection algorithm, achieving the accuracy of 0.930 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.926 to 0.933) and AUROC of 0.901 (95% CI, 0.897 to 0.905). For this model, D45% of the oral cavity, subsite, V75Gy of the parotid glands and total dose to the target were found to be the most important features. All modeling approaches achieved the accuracy and AUROC of at least 0.756 and 0.722 and the error rates obtained by all modeling approaches were insignificantly different.
conclusionThe inclusion of clinical and dose-volumetric features were most promising for ML-based prediction of severe OM, although information obtained prior to dose calculation (clinical or radiomic) may also be used exclusively with insignificantly different error rates.
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.