ArticleNeuro-oncology advances
Explainable machine learning/artificial intelligence model for estimating postoperative survival in renal cell carcinoma brain metastasis patients.
Article in Neuro-oncology advances. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Brain metastases (BM) from renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are associated with poor prognosis and limited survival. Prognostic tools specific to patients with RCC undergoing surgical resection of BM are lacking, and current models do not incorporate advanced machine learning (ML) approaches. This study aimed to develop and validate an ML-based model to predict overall survival (OS) after BM resection in RCC. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 253 patients with histologically confirmed RCC and radiographically or pathologically confirmed BM who underwent neurosurgical resection at a tertiary referral center (1993-2021). Clinical and radiologic features were used to train and internally validate multiple ML models for OS prediction. Model performance was assessed using the concordance index (C-index) and time-dependent Area Under the Curve (AUC) at 1, 2, and 5 years. Feature importance and interpretability were evaluated using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). Results: The XGBoostCox + plsRcox model outperformed other algorithms, achieving a test C-Index of 0.59. AUCs at 1, 2, and 5 years were 0.61, 0.64, and 0.69 in the test cohort. SHAP analysis revealed extracranial disease status, number of BM, preoperative symptoms, and age at surgical resection as the most influential predictors. Kaplan-Meier analysis using an optimal cutoff based on the training cohort demonstrated significant survival differences between high- and low-risk groups in the test cohort (HR: 2.06 [1.26-3.35], Conclusions and Relevance: An explainable XGBoostCox + plsRcox model accurately predicts OS after BM resection in RCC and enables personalized risk assessment via an online calculator (https://hasanovlab-rcc-bm-resect.share.connect.posit.cloud/).
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.