ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
Comparative evaluation of machine learning models for predicting PD-L1 high expression in resectable NSCLC: a dual-center study integrating [
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate prediction of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) high expression (tumor proportion score [TPS] ≥50%) is important for identifying patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who may benefit from neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (nCIT). This study aimed to evaluate eight machine learning (ML) algorithms and develop a non-invasive, [ Methods: A retrospective, dual-center cohort of 269 patients with stage IB-IIIB resectable NSCLC who underwent [ Results: Of the 269 enrolled patients, 79.9% were male and 32.0% were older than 65 years. LASSO regression identified five core predictors: smoking status, histological type, T stage, histological grade, and SUVmax. In the independent external validation set, Support Vector Machine (SVM) (AUC = 0.858), Random Forest (RF) (AUC = 0.849), and Logistic Regression (LR) (AUC = 0.833) demonstrated good discriminative performance. However, DeLong's test indicated no statistically significant advantage of the complex models over the traditional LR model (all adjusted P = 1.000). Prioritizing model transparency and interpretability, an LR-based nomogram was established, which exhibited favorable calibration and provided clinical net benefit across a wide range of threshold probabilities in both cohorts. Conclusions: We developed and validated an interpretable, [
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.