ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
Developing a prediction model for poor prognosis in MPA patients using initial admission examination results: a machine learning study from Southwest China.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) is one of the main types of ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV), but current admission examination indicators are limited in predicting poor prognosis for MPA. This study aims to develop a prediction model for adverse prognosis in MPA patients using initial admission examination results. Methods: We performed machine learning (ML) algorithms on initial admission examination data to predict adverse outcomes in MPA, such as in-hospital death or self-discharge due to critical condition. We analyzed data from 12,497 patients who underwent ANCA tests in Deyang People's Hospital between November 2017 and October 2025, focusing on 230 hospitalized patients. We used least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), logistic regression (LR), and random forest (RF) to select variables, and evaluated the diagnostic efficacy using ML algorithms. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) was used for model interpretability. A nomogram model was developed to predict adverse outcomes, highlighting variable contributions and including calibration and decision curve analysis (DCA) curves. Results: In this study of 230 MPA patients, 56 had poor prognosis while 174 had good prognosis. Seven indicators were identified using LASSO, LR and RF. They were appropriate use of immunosuppressants, age, serum albumin, infection, BVAS, C-reactive protein (CRP) and anti- myeloperoxidase. Among five ML models, support vector classification (SVC) had a high area under the curve (AUC) (AUC = 0.848, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.684-0.965) in the prediction model, and had the highest AUC (AUC = 0.886, 95% CI: 0.741-0.981). The SHAP analysis highlighted elevated CRP levels as the top predictor of poor prognosis. Standardized immunosuppressive therapy was found to mitigate this risk. Nomogram model confirmed these findings, and calibration and DCA curves showed this model was reliable and useful for clinical decisions. Conclusions: We developed a prediction model for adverse outcomes in MPA patients, utilizing clinical and laboratory data collected on the day of admission. SVC algorithm exhibited moderate predictive efficacy. Factors such as elevated serum CRP levels, moderate reductions in serum albumin, infection, advanced age, BVAS larger than 15, and anti-MPO were positively associated with adverse prognoses. Standardized immunosuppressive therapy was shown to mitigate this risk, offering a valuable reference for 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.