ArticleTranslational cancer research2026
Interpretable machine learning prediction of 1-year overall survival in pancreatic cancer patients aged 65 years and older.
Article in Translational cancer research, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pancreatic cancer (PC) has an extremely poor prognosis, and elderly patients aged ≥65 years account for the majority of PC cases with more complex clinical characteristics. Accurate prediction of 1-year survival rate is crucial for individualized treatment decision-making in this subgroup. This study aimed to construct and validate machine learning (ML) models for predicting 1-year survival in PC patients aged ≥65 years, and to identify key prognostic factors using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis. Methods: Clinical data of PC patients aged ≥65 years diagnosed between 2011 and 2015 were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Demographic, tumor-related, and treatment-related indicators were included as predictive variables. Six ML algorithms [decision tree (DT), random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM), logistic regression (LR), and K-nearest neighbor (KNN)] were used to construct prediction models. LASSO regression was employed for feature selection and optimal model screening. Model performance was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, and F1-score. SHAP analysis was performed to interpret the optimal model and clarify the importance of key features. Results: A total of 5,601 eligible patients were included in this study. LASSO regression identified 6 key prognostic features: surgery, grade, T stage, chemotherapy, radiation, and N stage. The RF model showed the best predictive performance, with an AUC of 0.875 in the training set and 0.799 in the validation set. The confusion matrix of the RF model on the validation set demonstrated good discrimination between survived and non-survived patients. SHAP analysis revealed that surgery was the most influential factor promoting 1-year survival, while higher grade was the dominant factor reducing survival probability. T stage and chemotherapy also had significant impacts on the predictive outcome. Conclusions: The RF model constructed based on SEER database data can accurately predict the 1-year survival rate of PC patients aged ≥65 years. Surgery, grade, T stage, and chemotherapy are the key prognostic factors. This interpretable ML model provides a reliable tool for clinicians to assess short-term prognosis and formulate individualized treatment strategies for elderly PC patients.
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.