MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410870007 · doi:10.18280/rces.120101

Predicting Lymph Node Metastasis in T1 Colorectal Cancer Patients Using Interpretable Machine Learning Models: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

2025· article· en· W4410870007 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qingyang Fang, Xinyang He

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Computer Engineering Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLymph node metastasisColorectal cancerMedicineLymph nodeMulticenter studyRetrospective cohort studyMetastasisCancerOncologyArtificial intelligenceGeneral surgeryInternal medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whether lymph node metastasis (LNM) is present is crucial for treatment decisions in T1 colorectal cancer (T1 CRC).This study developed predictive models using data from 1,205 patients across seven Chinese medical centers.We evaluated 29 machine learning algorithms and identified CatBoost as the top performer (AUC: 86%, accuracy: 96%).SHAP analysis revealed key predictors of LNM risk, including lymphovascular invasion, age, tumor size, invasion depth, and total lymph node count.Less influential features included perineural invasion and tumor location.The study highlights the importance of retrieving more lymph nodes during surgery to improve staging accuracy.A user-friendly online tool was developed to support clinical decision-making.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Computer Engineering StudiesSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207