Author
Listed:
- Jiyang Liao
- Qianwen Xiang
- Xingwang Chen
- Long Wu
- Houwang Chen
- Zhijun Yao
- Huachu Wu
- Jianbo Lai
Abstract
Background: The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has shown inconsistent prognostic value in individuals with sepsis. This study aimed to clarify its ability to predict 28-day mortality via a machine learning-based analysis of a large ICU database. Methods: This retrospective analysis employed data from the MIMIC-IV database (v3.1). The Boruta algorithm combined with XGBoost was used for two-stage feature selection. Patients were stratified by NLR quartiles into three groups (low: 14.70). This study defined 28-day mortality as the primary outcome. Associations between the NLR and mortality were evaluated by using multivariable logistic regression (progressively adjusted for demographic, clinical, and machine learning-derived features), along with restricted cubic splines. Sensitivity analyses included quantifying NLR feature importance via machine learning and performing subgroup analyses across clinical strata. Results: This cohort study included 4,376 patients with a 28-day mortality rate of 18.4%. Compared with the SOFA and SAPS II scores, the prediction performance of XGBoost was superior (ROC-AUC 0.875; 95% CI 0.854–0.896; PR-AUC 0.603). Although the NLR ranked 14th in SHAP-based feature importance, multivariable analysis confirmed its independent association with elevated mortality risk: 28-day (OR 1.16; 95% CI 1.06–1.27; p 45 years and those with SOFA scores ≤4 or SAPS II scores >29. Specifically, patients ≥65 years of age demonstrated a 17% increase in 28-day mortality risk (p = 0.019), and patients with a SOFA score ≤4 exhibited a greater than 20% elevated risk across all of the endpoints (p
Suggested Citation
Jiyang Liao & Qianwen Xiang & Xingwang Chen & Long Wu & Houwang Chen & Zhijun Yao & Huachu Wu & Jianbo Lai, 2026.
"The prognostic value of the early neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio for 28-day mortality in sepsis patients: A machine learning-based investigation of the MIMIC database,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(6), pages 1-20, June.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0348676
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0348676
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0348676. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.