Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40414906›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

A predictive model for hospital death in cancer patients with acute pulmonary embolism using XGBoost machine learning and SHAP interpretation.

Zhen-Nan Yuan, Yu-Juan Xue, Hai-Jun Wang, Shi-Ning Qu, Chu-Lin Huang, Hao Wang, Hao Zhang, Min-Ze Zhang, Xue-Zhong Xing

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Zhen-Nan YuanDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Yu-Juan XueDepartment of Pediatrics, Peking University People's Hospital, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Hai-Jun WangDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Shi-Ning QuDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Chu-Lin HuangDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Hao WangDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Hao ZhangDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China.
Min-Ze ZhangPeople's Hospital of Lishui District, Nanjing, Lishui, 211200, Jiangsu, China. 18761825997@163.com.
Xue-Zhong XingDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100021, China. xxzncc@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The prediction of in-hospital mortality in cancer patients with acute pulmonary embolism (APE) remains a significant clinical challenge. This study aimed to develop and validate a machine learning model using XGBoost to predict in-hospital mortality in this vulnerable population. A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the MIMIC-IV 2.2 database and external data from the intensive care unit of Cancer hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, collected between May 1, 2021, and April 30, 2023. A total of 448 cancer patients with APE were included from the MIMIC-IV 2.2 database, divided into a training set (70%, n = 314) and an internal validation set (30%, n = 134). An external validation cohort consisted of 56 patients. An XGBoost model was trained and the SHAP (SHapley Additive Explanations) method was used to identify the top 10 predictors of in-hospital mortality. These predictors included Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, albumin, platelet count, age, serum creatinine, hemoglobin, presence of metastasis, lactate, creatine kinase (CK), and types of cancer. The XGBoost model achieved an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.806 (95% CI: 0.717-0.896) in the internal validation set and 0.724 (95% CI: 0.686-0.901) in the external validation set. Calibration curves indicated good model fit, and decision curve analysis (DCA) demonstrated a high clinical benefit across both the internal and external validation cohorts. The XGBoost model, leveraging SHAP for interpretation, effectively predicts in-hospital mortality in cancer patients with APE. This model provides valuable insights for clinical decision-making and has the potential to improve patient outcomes through early intervention and personalized treatment strategies. Further validation in diverse clinical settings is warranted to confirm its generalizability.

Indexed as

Hospital MortalityMachine LearningNeoplasmsPulmonary EmbolismAcute DiseaseAgedBoosting Machine Learning AlgorithmsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisRetrospective StudiesROC CurveAcute pulmonary embolismCancerIn-hospital mortalityMachine learning

Identifiers

PMID40414906
PMCPMC12104392

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.