ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Interpretable machine-learning prediction of severe myelosuppression in colorectal cancer patients receiving chemotherapy using XGBoost and SHAP: a retrospective study with a web-based calculator.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. 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.
- Machine learning-based models for predicting the efficacy and safety of recombinant human interleukin-11 in the treatment of cancer therapy-induced thrombocytopenia: exploration and preliminary validation from a multicenter retrospective study.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) are susceptible to severe myelosuppression (SMS) after chemotherapy. Conventional linear models may have limited performance and may fail to capture complex, nonlinear risk patterns, which can hinder early risk stratification and timely intervention. We aimed to develop an interpretable machine-learning model to predict SMS and to build a web-based calculator for individualized risk assessment. Methods: We retrospectively enrolled 987 CRC patients who received capecitabine plus oxaliplatin with or without targeted therapy at our hospital between March 2021 and November 2025. Nine predictors were selected using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression. We developed and compared several models, including extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), random forest, decision tree, and support vector machine. Model interpretability was assessed using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) at both the global and individual levels to characterize nonlinear effects and feature interactions. A web-based, real-time risk calculator was also implemented. Results: On the validation set, the XGBoost model achieved the best balance of predictive performance (AUC = 0.906; sensitivity = 0.864). SHAP analysis quantified the contribution of each feature, with the top three contributors being white blood cell count, number of chemotherapy cycles, and Karnofsky Performance Status score. Nonlinear threshold effects were observed for continuous variables, including white blood cell count, platelet count, and serum albumin. Interactions were identified between white blood cell count and performance status, as well as between white blood cell count and number of chemotherapy cycles. The web-based calculator enables real-time individualized risk estimation. Decision curve analysis indicated favorable net clinical benefit across a range of decision thresholds. Conclusion: We developed a high-performing and interpretable model for predicting SMS in CRC patients receiving chemotherapy. The accompanying web-based calculator may provide a practical tool for early risk stratification and individualized management of chemotherapy-related SMS.
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.