Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Stem Cells. Aug 26, 2026; 18(8): 121077
Published online Aug 26, 2026. doi: 10.4252/wjsc.121077
Published online Aug 26, 2026. doi: 10.4252/wjsc.121077
Table 5 Validation checklist for leukemic stem cell/hematopoietic stem cell artificial intelligence models, adapted from TRIPOD + AI and PROBAST + AI guidelines with hematopoietic stem cell/Leukemic stem cell-specific requirements
| Validation domain | Key requirement | LSC/HSC-specific considerations |
| Cohort representativeness | The training cohort must represent the target clinical population with respect to age, disease stage, and treatment era | LSC/HSC models should include balanced representation of ELN risk categories, stem-cell compartment measurements (CD34+CD38- frequencies), and both newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory patients[52,106-108] |
| Event counts | An adequate number of outcome events (relapse, death, MRD positivity) to prevent overfitting | Minimum 10-20 events per predictor variable; for LSC-specific endpoints (e.g., LSC+ vs LSC-), ensure sufficient LSC+ cases across validation sets[52,55] |
| Internal validation | Model performance assessed on held-out data from the same source (cross-validation or hold-out split) | Report performance metrics (AUROC, calibration) separately for LSC-enriched vs LSC-depleted subgroups if the model claims to encode stemness biology[52,109,110] |
| External validation | Independent cohort from a different institution, time period, or geography | Essential for LSC models given center-to-center variability in LSC phenotyping protocols and MRD detection thresholds[52,106,110] |
| Prospective evaluation | Forward-looking validation on newly enrolled patients before clinical deployment | Required for LSC-targeted therapy selection models to confirm that AI predictions align with clinical outcomes under prospective conditions[55,109,111] |
| Dataset shift detection | Assess whether model performance degrades when applied to data with distributional differences (batch effects, assay drift) | Critical for flow cytometry-based LSC models: Validate across different antibody panels, fluorophores, and cytometers; report performance stratified by batch[55,112] |
| Calibration assessment | Predicted probabilities should match observed event frequencies | For LSC burden models, calibration plots should show agreement between predicted LSC frequency (or surrogate score) and directly measured LSC% by flow cytometry in the calibration subset[52,55,106] |
| Decision-curve analysis | Net benefit of model-guided decisions compared to treat-all or treat-none strategies | For LSC-directed therapies (venetoclax, Menin inhibitors), decision curves should quantify clinical utility across risk thresholds relevant to treatment intensification decisions[55,111] |
| Explainability and feature attribution | Use of XAI methods (SHAP, attention weights) to identify which features drive predictions | Essential for validating LSC-AI hypothesis: Determine whether high-risk predictions are driven by known stemness genes (17-gene LSC score, HOXMEIS1 programs) or alternative pathways[52,113] |
| Bias and fairness evaluation | Assess performance stratified by demographic subgroups and underrepresented populations | Evaluate whether LSC models perform equivalently across age groups (pediatric vs adult vs elderly AML), ancestry, and sex; report subgroup-specific metrics[107] |
| Missing data handling | Transparent reporting of missingness patterns and imputation strategies | LSC models often integrate multi-omics data with heterogeneous completeness (e.g., scRNA-seq available for a subset); clearly document handling of missing modalities and proteins in CITE-seq[111] |
| Comparator benchmarking | Performance compared to established clinical risk systems | For AML LSC models, benchmark against ELN 2022 risk classification, 17-gene LSC score, and LSC frequency by flow cytometry; report incremental predictive value[114] |
- Citation: Abd El Ghaffar HA, Arafat AMA, Khattab EHA, Khattab MA, Khallaf AM, Mahgoub SMA. Artificial intelligence in hematopoietic stem cell research and associated malignancies: From disease modeling to cell manufacturing. World J Stem Cells 2026; 18(8): 121077
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-0210/full/v18/i8/121077.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4252/wjsc.121077