ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Transvaginal ultrasound-detected endometrial echogenicity heterogeneity in diagnosing endometrial carcinoma: risk factors and nomogram-based prediction model.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to develop a nomogram prediction model based on risk factors associated with endometrial cancer (EC) diagnosed via transvaginal ultrasound (TVS)-detected non-uniform echogenicity. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 564 female patients (control group: normal/benign lesions, n = 475; observation group: EC, n = 89) was conducted. TVS findings were compared with pathological diagnoses, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to assess diagnostic performance. Patients were split 7:3 into training and internal validation sets. Multivariate logistic regression identified predictors for nomogram construction, which was validated for performance and utility. SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) analysis was applied for model interpretability, and clinical cases were used for demonstration. Results: The area under the curve (AUC) of TVS detection of endometrial echogenicity heterogeneity for EC diagnosis was 0.726. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that body mass index (BMI), hypertension, diabetes, age at menopause > 50 years, and non-uniform echogenicity were risk factors for EC. The prediction model constructed demonstrated good calibration performance in the training set and excellent discrimination ability and stable predictive consistency in the internal validation set. Decision curve analysis further confirmed its clinical utility. SHAP analysis of the established nomogram revealed that age at menopause and heterogeneous endometrial echogenicity were the most influential predictors in the model, with echogenicity heterogeneity consistently associated with an increased risk of EC. When the nomogram predicted an EC probability of ≥ 0.5, the number of predicted positive cases was 93 (16.49%), showing no statistically significant difference ( Conclusion: TVS detection of heterogeneous endometrial echogenicity holds supplementary diagnostic value for EC. The nomogram model constructed in this study integrates key clinical and sonographic features, demonstrating favorable predictive performance and clinical applicability. SHAP analysis confirmed that echogenicity heterogeneity and age at menopause are important predictors, enhancing the model's interpretability. This tool aids in early identification of high-risk patients and provides a reference for clinical decision-making.
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.