ArticleCancer medicine2026
Predicting Post-Radiotherapy Epigenetic Age Acceleration From Pre-Treatment Data Using a Machine Learning Framework in Head and Neck Cancer Patients.
Article in Cancer medicine, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEpigenetic age acceleration in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients undergoing radiotherapy has been linked to adverse treatment outcomes. Understanding a patient's likely epigenetic aging response prior to radiotherapy has the potential to inform healthcare planning and clinical decision-making; however, current methods cannot effectively predict these changes throughout treatment, particularly without expensive assays of epigenetic alterations.
methodsThis study developed and validated a machine learning framework to predict EAA following radiotherapy, utilizing pre-radiotherapy (Time 1) sociodemographic information, symptom reports, clinical measurements, and immune biomarkers. Various machine learning models were explored to forecast EAA across three post-treatment clinic stages: Immediately post-radiotherapy (Time 2), six months (Time 3), and 12 months post-radiotherapy (Time 4).
resultsOur results demonstrate that: (1) deep learning methods, particularly TabNet, outperform conventional algorithms with an average RMSE of 4.08 (SD = 0.32); (2) predictions are most accurate immediately post-treatment (Time 2 RMSE: 4.87); (3) baseline immune markers, including absolute eosinophil count and hemoglobin levels, are consistent predictors across timepoints; and (4) specific patient subgroups show distinct prediction accuracies (RMSE range: 1.70-4.34).
conclusionThese results suggest that pre-treatment demographic and clinical data effectively predict post-treatment EAA trajectories without expensive epigenetic assays, enabling cost-effective early identification of high-risk patients for potential targeted interventions before adverse effects manifest.
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.