ArticleScientific reports2026
Machine learning prediction of postoperative recurrence in bladder cancer using clinical and laboratory indicators.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Postoperative recurrence is a major determinant of prognosis in bladder cancer. Early identification of patients at high risk is essential for optimizing individualized follow-up and therapeutic strategies. This study aimed to develop a comprehensive recurrence risk prediction model based on clinical characteristics, laboratory parameters, and postoperative follow-up data, and to identify the key risk factors associated with recurrence. A total of 488 patients with bladder cancer were retrospectively enrolled. Demographic, lifestyle, comorbidity, tumor-related, surgical, and laboratory data at 3 months postoperatively were collected. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to identify recurrence-associated variables. Predictive models were constructed using four machine learning algorithms: eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and k-Nearest Neighbors (KNN). Model performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, decision curve analysis (DCA), and k-fold cross-validation. Feature importance and individual risk contributions were interpreted using SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) analysis. Age, smoking history, tumor stage, tumor number, tumor size, pathological grade, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), urine cytology, hematuria, NMP22, and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) were identified as independent predictors of bladder cancer recurrence. Among all models, XGBoost demonstrated the best predictive performance, with an AUC of 0.960 in the training set, 0.925 in the validation set, and 0.850 in the external validation cohort. SHAP analysis revealed that smoking history, tumor stage, tumor number, tumor size, pathological grade, NLR, urine cytology, hematuria, and NMP22 were the most influential predictors of recurrence and contributed significantly to inter-individual risk differences. The multidimensional machine learning–based recurrence prediction model developed in this study accurately identifies high-risk bladder cancer patients and elucidates key risk factors, offering a robust evidence base for personalized postoperative surveillance and intervention. Furthermore, it provides novel insights into the biological mechanisms underlying recurrence. Future studies with larger, multicenter cohorts are warranted to validate the model’s robustness and clinical applicability.
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.