ArticlePloS one2026
Serum Cystatin 4 combined with routine clinical laboratory indicators: A support vector machine diagnostic model for early screening of gastrointestinal tumors.
Article in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gastrointestinal tumors lack non-invasive early screening tools, with most patients diagnosed at advanced stages. Serum tumor markers combined with machine learning show promise, but single markers have low specificity. This study aimed to construct a non-invasive diagnostic model using multiple laboratory variables. A retrospective study included 214 gastrointestinal tumor patients (observation group) and 130 non-tumor individuals (control group). Thirty-eight laboratory indicators were detected, and seven core variables (HCT, Age, TP, ALB, PLT, WBC, CST4) were identified via feature selection. Eleven machine learning algorithms were used to build models, with performance evaluated by AUC, sensitivity, specificity, calibration curves, and DCA. Serum CST4 levels were significantly higher in the observation group (P < 0.001, AUC = 0.706). The SVM model showed the best performance: AUC = 0.85 (95% CI: 0.78-0.92), sensitivity = 95.4% (95% CI: 0.87-0.98), specificity = 61.5% (95% CI: 0.52-0.71), PPV = 80.5% (95% CI: 0.74-0.86), NPV = 88.9% (95% CI: 0.81-0.94) in the test set. Calibration curves demonstrated high consistency (deviation < 5%), and DCA confirmed superior net benefits. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis identified HCT, CST4, and Age as top contributors. This internally validated tool demonstrated promising preliminary performance for gastrointestinal tumor screening in high-risk populations (sensitivity 95.4%, specificity 61.5%). Due to its modest specificity, it is suitable as an auxiliary risk stratification tool for high-risk individuals but not for general population screening. External prospective multi-center validation is mandatory before clinical application.
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.