Development and Validation of a Nomogram for Predicting Postoperative Early Relapse and Survival in Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Early relapse after hepatectomy presents a significant challenge in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this study was to construct and validate a novel nomogram model for predicting early relapse and survival after hepatectomy for HCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a large-scale, multicenter retrospective analysis of 1,505 patients with surgically treated HCC from 4 medical centers. All patients were randomly divided into either the training cohort (n=1,053) or the validation cohort (n=452) in a 7:3 ratio. A machine learning-based nomogram model for prediction of HCC was established by integrating multiple risk factors that influence early relapse and survival, which were identified from preoperative clinical data and postoperative pathologic characteristics of the patients. RESULTS: The median time to early relapse was 7 months, whereas the median time from early relapse to death was only 19 months. The concordance indexes of the postoperative nomogram for predicting disease-free survival and overall survival were 0.741 and 0.739, respectively, with well-calibrated curves demonstrating good consistency between predicted and observed outcomes. Moreover, the accuracy and predictive performance of the postoperative nomograms were significantly superior to those of the preoperative nomogram and the other 7 HCC staging systems. The patients in the intermediate- and high-risk groups of the model had significantly higher probabilities of early and critical recurrence (P<.001), whereas those in the low-risk group had higher probabilities of late and local recurrence (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: This postoperative nomogram model can better predict early recurrence and survival and can serve as a useful tool to guide clinical treatment decisions for patients with HCC.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".