ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Development and validation of an interpretable machine learning model for predicting chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in small cell lung cancer: a web-based clinical decision support tool.
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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To develop and validate an interpretable machine learning model for predicting grade ≥3 chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC), and to establish a web-based clinical decision support tool for individualized risk assessment. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational analysis of prospectively collected clinical data and enrolled 209 patients with SCLC who underwent 840 chemotherapy cycles between 2019 and 2022 from Tianjin Medical University General Hospital. Patients rather than chemotherapy cycles were randomly assigned into the training (80%) and testing (20%) cohorts. Feature selection was performed using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression and the Boruta algorithm. Machine learning algorithms were compared using patient-level 5-fold GroupKFold cross-validation. Hyperparameters were optimized using Optuna, and model interpretability was evaluated using Shapley additive explanations, Local interpretable model-agnostic explanations, Partial dependence plots. Three clinically oriented probability thresholds were further assessed to support different clinical decision-making scenarios. A web-based clinical decision support tool was subsequently developed. Results: CatBoost achieved the highest cross-validation performance while demonstrating the most stable results across folds, and was selected as the final model. Five predictors were selected for model development, including chemotherapy cycle, chemotherapy regimen, prophylactic medication, absolute neutrophil count (ANC) and rescue treatment in the prior cycle. In the independent testing cohort, the optimized CatBoost model achieved an AUC of 0.785 (95% CI, 0.706-0.865), with good calibration and favorable clinical net benefit. Threshold-specific analyses illustrated the expected sensitivity-specificity trade-offs for exploratory screening- and confirmatory-oriented operating points. Interpretability analyses identified early chemotherapy cycles, rescue treatment in the prior cycle, absence of prophylactic medication, VP16 plus platinum regimen, and lower baseline ANC as predictors associated with higher CIN risk in this dataset. The model was further deployed as an interactive web-based application, available at http://39.96.172.15:8080/. Conclusions: An interpretable CatBoost model was developed for predicting grade ≥3 CIN in patients with SCLC. The integration of the model with a web-based clinical decision support tool may facilitate individualized risk stratification.
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.