Your new experience awaits. Try the new design now and help us make it even better

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Oncol.

Sec. Gynecological Oncology

Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Clinical Outcomes in Cervical Cancer Using Routine Hematological Indices: Development and Web Implementation

Provisionally accepted
  • 1Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
  • 2Shanghai Key Laboratory of Female Reproductive Endocrine-Related Diseases, Shanghai, China
  • 3Shanghai Key Lab of Reproduction and Development, Shanghai, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Background: Cervical cancer prognosis critically depends on tumor invasiveness, yet existing predictive tools lack accessibility and generalizability. We aimed to develop predictive models using comprehensive hematological profiling of routine test to assess invasiveness and survival, improving clinical decision-making. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 512 cervical cancer patients who underwent radical surgery. A panel of hematological indices was evaluated, including inflammatory markers, coagulation parameters, and metabolic indicators. Machine learning (ML) algorithms innovatively integrated with traditional regression were employed for feature selection and model development. Models were internal validated by bootstrap methods for discrimination (AUC/C-index) and calibration. Clinical utility was assessed by decision curve analysis (DCA). Web-based Shiny applications of these models were deployed. Results: Using routine hematological indices selected from ML-based methods, we identified the optimal variable set for each clinical outcome prediction model based on C-index comparisons. The multivariable analyses of these variables identified hematological parameters associated with cervical cancer progression and prognosis. TG, HGB, Eosinophil count, TCLR, and NAR acted as protective factors, while LDL, WBC, FAR, ELR, DDI, FLR, ENLR, SII and platelet count were risk factors linked to advanced disease features. In addition, Tbil and DDI were consistent risk factors for both recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). The models assessed invasiveness risk and survival in two critical periods: pre-surgery and post-surgery in cervical cancer patients. The AUC values for predicting locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC), uterine body invasion (UBI), lymph node positivity (LNP), adjuvant therapy (ADT), parauterine invasion (PUI), and vaginal invasion (VI) were 0.714, 0.781, 0.781, 0.719, 0.756, and 0.700, respectively. For OS, the pre-surgery and post-surgery models achieved C-index of 0.875 and 0.906, while the RFS models yielded 0.790 and 0.863, respectively. All models showed AUC ≥ 0.7, strong calibration, and positive net benefit on DCA. Interactive web tools were implemented based on these models. Conclusions: Comprehensive hematological profiling enables accurate prediction of cervical cancer invasiveness and survival during different decision-making periods. Our ML-enhanced, web-implemented models can enhance risk stratification and clinical decisions, particularly in resource-limited settings.

Keywords: cervical cancer, risk prediction, prognosis, machine learning, Shiny

Received: 07 Jul 2025; Accepted: 19 Nov 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Bai, Chen, Qiu and Hua. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence:
Junjun Qiu, qiu_junjun@fudan.edu.cn
Keqin Hua, huakeqin@fudan.edu.cn

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.