WHO grade II and III gliomas demonstrate diverse biological behaviors resulting in variable survival outcomes. In the context of glioma prognosis, machine learning (ML) approaches could facilitate the navigation through the maze of factors influencing survival, aiding clinicians in generating more precise and personalized survival predictions. Here we report the utilization of ML models in predicting survival at 12, 24, 36, and 60 months following grade II and III glioma diagnosis. From the National Cancer Database, we analyze 10,001 WHO grade II and 11,456 grade III cranial gliomas. Using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) values, we deploy the top-performing models in a web application for individualized predictions. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) enhance the interpretability of the models. Top-performing predictive models are the ones built with LightGBM and Random Forest algorithms. For grade II gliomas, the models yield AUROC values ranging from 0.813 to 0.896 for predicting mortality across different timeframes, and for grade III gliomas, the models yield AUROCs ranging from 0.855 to 0.878. ML models provide individualized survival forecasts for grade II and III glioma patients across multiple clinically relevant time points. The user-friendly web application represents a pioneering digital tool to potentially integrate predictive analytics into neuro-oncology clinical practice, to empower prognostication and personalize clinical decision-making.

Due to significant injury heterogeneity, outcome prediction following traumatic brain injury (TBI) is challenging. This study aimed to develop a simple model for high-accuracy mortality risk prediction after TBI. Data from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) Trauma Quality Program (TQP) from 2019 to 2021 was used to develop a summary score based on age, the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) component subscores, and pupillary reactivity data. We then compared the predictive accuracy to that of the Corticosteroid Randomisation After Significant Head Injury Trial (CRASH)-Basic and International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trial in TBI (IMPACT)-Core models. Two separate series of sensitivity analyses were conducted to further assess our model's generalizability. We evaluated predictive performance of the models with discrimination [the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUC), sensitivity, specificity] and calibration (Brier score). Discriminative ability was compared with DeLong tests. 259,404 patients were included in the present study (mean age, 60 years; 93,495 (36 %) female). The mortality score after TBI (MOST) model (AUC = 0.875) had better discrimination (DeLong test p values < 0.00001) than CRASH-Basic (AUC = 0.837) and IMPACT-Core (AUC = 0.821) models, and superior calibration (MOST = 0.02729, CRASH-Basic = 0.02962, IMPACT-Core = 0.02962) in predicting in-hospital mortality. The MOST model similarly outperformed in predicting 3-, 7-, 14-, and 30-day mortality. The MOST model can be rapidly calculated and outperforms two widely used models for predicting mortality in TBI patients. It utilizes a larger, contemporaneous dataset that reflects modern trauma care.