ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2025
Development and validation of an interpretable machine learning model for predicting Gleason score upgrade in prostate cancer.
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2025. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The high incidence of Gleason score upgrade (GSU) can lead urologists to underestimate tumor aggressiveness, resulting in suboptimal treatment decisions. This study aimed to develop an interpretable machine learning model to predict the risk of GSU in individuals with prostate cancer (PCa) based on readily available clinical parameters. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) at Shanghai General Hospital and West China Hospital. Data from Shanghai General Hospital were categorized into a training set (80%) and a test set (20%), while data from West China Hospital were used for external validation. Preoperative clinical and pathological data were collected. Nine machine learning models [including random forest (RF) and light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM)], were developed, and the model demonstrating the best predictive performance was selected as the final model. Model performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, decision curves, and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) interpretation. Results: The LightGBM model demonstrated strong predictive performance, achieving an area under the ROC curve of 84.53% in the test set and 76.61% in external validation. Significant factors associated with GSU included the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade, age, clinical tumor stage (T stage), body mass index, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), free-to-total PSA ratio (f/t PSA), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and bilateral tumor involvement. An online prediction tool was developed based on this model. Conclusions: A machine learning model and an online prediction tool were developed to accurately predict GSU and identify factors associated with this process. This approach may assist clinicians in identifying individuals at high-risk for GSU and facilitating evidence-based treatment decisions.
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.