ArticleActa orthopaedica2026
Machine learning and logistic regression in estimating survival in patients with high-malignant deep-seated soft tissue sarcomas: development and analysis based on a population-based retrospective cohort.
Article in Acta orthopaedica, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeSoft tissue sarcomas are a heterogeneous group of malignant tumors with a high risk of metastasis, primarily to the lungs, making accurate survival prediction an essential part of long-term planning. No machine learning (ML) survival prediction models have been developed using a modern, population-based dataset from Scandinavia. We aimed to develop and compare ML models with logistic regression in predicting 5-year survival in soft tissue sarcoma patients and identify key predictive variables.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included patients diagnosed with deep-seated, high-grade soft tissue sarcomas of the extremities and trunk wall in Denmark from 2000 to 2016. Logistic regression was compared with 4 developed ML models, including random forest. Performance was assessed using the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and calibration metrics, with a 70:30 training-test split and 5-fold cross-validation to evaluate the models.
results516 patients were included, of whom 226 (44%) died within 5 years following surgery. Random forest demonstrated the best ML performance on the training set and was compared with logistic regression on the test set. Logistic regression achieved an AUC of 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.82), outperforming random forest's AUC of 0.65 (CI 0.56-0.74). Logistic regression also had higher sensitivity (0.65 vs 0.59) and specificity (0.72 vs 0.69), while random forest had a lower Brier score (0.38 vs 0.41).
conclusionAlthough the developed random forest ML model performed well during training, logistic regression outperformed it after internal validation. Soft tissue sarcomas located in the trunk, grade 3 tumors, and chemotherapy within 3 months of surgery demonstrated the highest negative effect on survival, consistent with current treatment protocols in which patients with high-risk disease are managed with more aggressive multimodal therapy. Further external validation and assessment of clinical utility are required before potential 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.