ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
A radiology-based differential diagnostic model for pelvic chondrosarcoma using random forest algorithms.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To develop a non-invasive diagnostic method for pelvic chondrosarcoma using clinical and radiological features, aiming to improve early diagnostic accuracy and reduce reliance on invasive biopsies. Methods: Two hundred and thirty-eight patients (39.50% with pelvic chondrosarcoma; median age, 42.87 years; 53.78% male; all Chinese) were enrolled and assigned to training (n = 167) and testing (n = 71) cohorts. Seven clinical and radiological features were evaluated for their potential associations with pelvic chondrosarcoma diagnosis. A predictive model was developed using a random forest algorithm and validated in the testing cohort, with performance assessed by partial dependence plot analysis and additional accuracy metrics. Results: The likelihood of a positive diagnosis of pelvic chondrosarcoma was significantly associated with age around 50 years (p < 0.001), the presence of high-intensity signals on T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (p = 0.021), a ring-and-arc enhancement pattern on contrast-enhanced T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (p < 0.001), and intratumoral calcification (p < 0.001). Tumor location was also a critical determinant (p = 0.009), with acetabular tumors exhibiting higher diagnostic probability. Among all variables, the random forest model identified the ring-and-arc enhancement pattern and patient age at diagnosis as the two most influential predictors. The model achieved excellent diagnostic performance, with a sensitivity of 96.55%, specificity of 90.48%, and overall accuracy of 92.96%. Conclusion: Our random forest-based model provides a reliable and practical non-invasive diagnostic tool for pelvic chondrosarcoma, improving diagnostic accuracy while potentially reducing the reliance on invasive biopsy procedures and supporting clinical decision-making.
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.