ArticleTranslational cancer research2025
Prediction of mortality in patients with retinoblastoma based on random survival forest: a retrospective cohort analysis using SEER database.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Causality-Guided Machine Learning for Retinoblastoma Survival Prediction: Development and Comparative Evaluation Using SEER.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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
Background: Given the absence of a predictive random survival forest (RSF) model for retinoblastoma (RB) patient prognosis, this study intends to build an RSF model. This study aimed to investigate the prognostic factors of patients with RB and provide experience for the diagnosis and treatment of RB patients in clinical practice. Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Stat Version 8.4.3 software was employed to download data from the SEER database. The relevant data of 577 patients diagnosed with RB from January 1, 2000 to December 30, 2019 were collected. The follow-up period for each patient began at the diagnosis of RB and ended at the time of death. The entire study cohort was randomly allocated to a training set and a validation set in a 7:3 proportion. Potential predictive factors and feature selection were appraised through the calculation of feature importance under the random forest framework. The optimal mtry and nodesize tuning parameters (mtry =10, nodesize =25) for the random forest model were found by means of the out-of-sample error. The optimal ntree (ntree =160) was selected by the learning curve. Based on the above selected parameters, a random survival model was established. The predictive performance was validated and evaluated by internal validation and consistency index (C-index), calibration curves, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: In this study, 577 patients were totally included, of whom 17 died. There were 279 males (48%) and 298 females (52%). There were 13 features included in the model, including stage, T-stage, M-stage, surgery radiation sequence, radiation, systemic therapy surgery sequence, age, chemotherapy, surgery, race, residence, sex, and primary sequence. The C-index value of the training cohort was 0.9803, and the C-index value of the validation cohort was 0.9122. The AUCs of the model for predicting mortality at 3, 5, and 10 years were 0.983, 0.986, and 0.996 in the training set, and 0.892, 0.910, and 0.904 in the validation cohort. Conclusions: We have established an RSF model with superior predictive performance based on simple variables in the SEER database. The most crucial variable in the model is Stage, followed by M stage and T stage, which may help evaluate the prognosis of high-risk RB patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.