ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2026
A machine learning-based risk prediction framework for atypical hyperplasia and endometrial cancer in postmenopausal women.
Article in World journal of surgical 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
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to develop and internally validate a machine learning-based model for predicting endometrial malignancy, defined as atypical hyperplasia or endometrial cancer (AH/EC), in postmenopausal women, integrating routinely available clinical, ultrasound, and laboratory features to support individualized diagnostic triage and potentially reduce unnecessary invasive diagnostic procedures in low-risk patients.
methodsThis retrospective, single-center study included 858 postmenopausal women who underwent endometrial histopathological evaluation at Henan Provincial People's Hospital between February 2022 and September 2025. The cohort was randomly divided into a training set (70%, n = 602) and a validation set (30%, n = 256). Feature selection was performed in the training cohort using univariate analysis (P < 0.001), LASSO regression with the λ₁se criterion, and the Boruta algorithm. Nine supervised machine learning models were developed in the training cohort and evaluated in the validation cohort. Model performance was assessed based on discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], sensitivity, specificity, F1 score), calibration (Brier score, calibration curves), and clinical utility (decision curve analysis). SHAP was applied to interpret the optimal model, and a nomogram was constructed based on the Logistic Regression model.
resultsA total of 155 patients (18.1%) were diagnosed with AH/EC. Six predictors were retained for model development: Endometrial thickness, Postmenopausal bleeding, Presence of blood flow signal, CA19-9, CA125, and Lesion outline regularity. In the validation cohort, the Neural Network model showed the highest AUC (0.840, 95% CI: 0.770-0.909), comparable to Logistic Regression (AUC 0.838, 95% CI: 0.768-0.908), with higher sensitivity (0.739 vs. 0.674) and similar calibration (Brier score 0.099 for both models). Both models showed acceptable validation performance.
conclusionA prediction framework based on routinely obtainable clinical, ultrasound, and laboratory variables may support personalized risk assessment in postmenopausal women undergoing diagnostic evaluation for suspected endometrial lesions. Further multicenter external validation and prospective studies are needed to confirm its generalizability 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.