MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413845279 · doi:10.1016/j.lana.2025.101213

A nomogram to predict development of brain metastasis in non-small cell lung cancer patients: a retrospective analysis using routinely available medical records

2025· article· en· W4413845279 on OpenAlexaff
Hannah Wilding, Nicholas Mikolajewicz, Debarati Bhanja, Camille Moeckel, Ahmad Ozair, Leonardo de Macêdo Filho, Kyle Tuohy, Nima Hamidi, Mara Trifoi, Brianna Snyder, Bailey Kuechenmeister, Schahin Salmanian, Manmeet S. Ahluwalia, Alireza Mansouri

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Regional Health - Americas · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBrain Metastases and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNomogramBrain metastasisMedical recordLung cancerRetrospective cohort studyMedicineOncologyMetastasisCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Brain metastases (BrM) are a frequent complication among patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). While guidelines exist for baseline CNS screening in advanced NSCLC, surveillance strategies for early-stage disease remain limited. This study aimed to develop a time-dependent BrM risk prediction nomogram using readily available clinical information. Methods: We analyzed a retrospective cohort of NSCLC patients at Penn State Health. Our objectives were to (1) systematically evaluate the performance of existing BrM risk prediction algorithms and (2) construct novel nomograms for BrM risk prediction in NSCLC. Using Cox-proportional hazard models with L1-regularization, we predicted BrM risk at 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year follow-up intervals. Findings: The patient cohort included 1904 patients (median age 68 years, range 38-94 years, BrM incidence 22.8%). The cohort included 1059 males (55.6%) and 845 females (44.4%). Of the cohort, 92.8% of patients identified as White (n = 1766), 1.0% as Asian (n = 19), 4.0% as Black (n = 77), and 2.2% as another race (n = 42). The Zhang 2021 model demonstrated the highest performance in predicting BrM incidence in our cohort, achieving an AUROC of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87, 0.95). Two novel models were developed: a baseline model incorporating clinical and imaging data at diagnosis (cTNM stage, age at diagnosis), and an extended model including additional clinical and treatment data (number of extracranial metastatic sites, prior radiotherapy, chemotherapy, surgery, and histology) (https://nmikolajewicz.shinyapps.io/nomogram_wilding2024/). While both models showed similar short-term performance, the extended model demonstrated superior predictive capacity (AUROC 0.91 at 3-years) for longer-term outcomes. Our nomograms rely exclusively on clinical features routinely documented in patient records, thereby requiring no additional investigations. Interpretation: These clinically accessible nomograms for BrM prediction will facilitate prognostic modeling, risk stratification, refinement of CNS screening guidelines, and patient counseling. Funding: None.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 venueThe Lancet Regional Health - AmericasSame topicBrain Metastases and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207