ArticleCancer medicine2026
Implementation of Risk Prediction Models Using Electronic Health Data for Early Detection of Pancreatic Cancer: A Prospective Pilot Feasibility Study.
Article in Cancer medicine, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsWe previously developed multiple machine-learning and regression-based risk prediction models using retrospective electronic health records (EHR) to estimate near-term risk of pancreatic cancer (PC). This pilot study aimed to assess the feasibility of an early detection strategy combining initial EHR-based risk prediction with downstream imaging and blood-based testing.
methodsThis prospective study included adults aged 50-84 years with an estimated ≥ 1% 18-month risk of PC, identified between January 2021 and March 2023 using four previously validated models. Patients with a history or active suspicion of PC were excluded. Participants completed cross-sectional imaging and CA19-9 Labs at baseline and again at 18 months. Outcomes included enrollment rates, test completion rate, and burden of incidental findings.
resultsOf 1251 eligible patients, 102 (8.2%) enrolled (median age 69 years [IQR 62-75]; 58% women; 48% Hispanic, 34% White, 11% Black, and 7% Asian). At baseline, 89 (87%) completed imaging and 98 (96%) completed CA19-9. At 18 months, 79% completed both imaging and CA19-9. Ten (10%) participants underwent additional clinical evaluations triggered by imaging findings. Evaluations included an endoscopic ultrasound, renal imaging, and FibroScan. CA19-9 results were normal in most participants, though 18% had elevated levels at baseline.
conclusionsReal-time EHR-based ML algorithms can be combined with blood- and imaging-based surveillance for early detection of PC with acceptable burden of incidental findings. However, improved patient engagement is a key aspect that will need to be addressed in order to successfully scale an AI-guided strategy for early detection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42885470What 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.