ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026
Development and validation of a predictive model for extranodal natural killer/T-cell lymphoma.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Current survival prediction model for extra-nodal natural killer/T-cell lymphoma (ENKTL) have poor accuracy. We developed and validated a machine-learning (ML) algorithm using clinical and pathological co-variates. Data from 977 subjects with ENKTL from 4 cohorts were analyzed. Model performance was evaluated using Harrell's c-index, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCAs). The Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM) outperformed the other 15 ML algorithms tested, leading to the development of the ENKTL-ML score. C-indexes of the evaluation and external validation cohorts were 0.82 (95% Confidence Interval [CI], 0.76, 0.87), 0.84 (0.81, 0.88) and 0.83 (0.72, 0.94). The ENKTL-ML score effectively stratified subjects into 3 groups with distinct survival outcomes. Our model was more accurate than the IPI, KPI, PINK-E, and NRI (all P < 0.001) models. An online calculator is available at https://highcloud.shinyapps.io/ENKTL_ML_Scores/ . The ENKTL-ML score should help physicians predict survival of people with ENKTL.
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.