ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2026
Machine learning models predict survival in unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results and Chinese cohort study.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 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: Patients with unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have heterogeneous survival outcomes, making accurate prognostic prediction challenging. This study aimed to develop and validate machine learning (ML) models for predicting overall survival (OS) after diagnosis in this patient population. Methods: Data from 11,675 patients retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database were used for model development and internal testing. An independent external cohort (n=162) from the Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing University was used for validation. We constructed models to predict 6-month, 1-year and 2-year OS using five ML algorithms, with model performance evaluated via the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy and calibration. The optimal model was interpreted using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). Results: The XGBoost model achieved the best performance for 6-month OS prediction in the test set (AUC =0.742, accuracy =0.708, sensitivity =0.746, specificity =0.637). It also showed predictive efficacy for 1-year (AUC =0.696) and 2-year (AUC =0.684) OS, with the highest discriminative ability at the 6-month time point. The model had good calibration and favorable net clinical benefit, while its performance decreased in external validation (AUC =0.647, accuracy =0.586). SHAP analysis revealed chemotherapy and radiotherapy as the most important predictive factors. Conclusions: By integrating multiple clinical and treatment variables, the XGBoost model provides supplementary prognostic information and complements the conventional tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system for 6-month, 1-year and 2-year OS prediction. This data-driven framework can assist individual risk stratification and improve the anatomical assessment of the TNM system.
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.