Application of machine learning for lung cancer survival prognostication-A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:4
作者
Didier, Alexander J. [1 ]
Nigro, Anthony [1 ]
Noori, Zaid [1 ,2 ]
Omballi, Mohamed A. [1 ,2 ]
Pappada, Scott M. [1 ,3 ]
Hamouda, Danae M. [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toledo, Dept Med, Coll Med & Life Sci, Toledo, OH 43606 USA
[2] Univ Toledo, Dept Med, Div Pulm & Crit Care Med, Coll Med & Life Sci, Toledo, OH USA
[3] Univ Toledo, Coll Med & Life Sci, Dept Anesthesiol, Toledo, OH USA
[4] Univ Toledo, Div Hematol & Oncol, Dept Med, Coll Med & Life Sci, Toledo, OH USA
来源
FRONTIERS IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE | 2024年 / 7卷
关键词
artificial intelligence; machine learning; lung cancer; prediction model; algorithm; PREDICTION; NETWORK; MODELS; DEATH; RISK; BIAS;
D O I
10.3389/frai.2024.1365777
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
Introduction: Machine learning (ML) techniques have gained increasing attention in the field of healthcare, including predicting outcomes in patients with lung cancer. ML has the potential to enhance prognostication in lung cancer patients and improve clinical decision-making. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the performance of ML models compared to logistic regression (LR) models in predicting overall survival in patients with lung cancer. Methods: We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. A comprehensive search was conducted in Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases using a predefined search query. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and conflicts were resolved by a third reviewer. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to select eligible studies. Risk of bias assessment was performed using predefined criteria. Data extraction was conducted using the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modeling Studies (CHARMS) checklist. Meta-analytic analysis was performed to compare the discriminative ability of ML and LR models. Results: The literature search resulted in 3,635 studies, and 12 studies with a total of 211,068 patients were included in the analysis. Six studies reported confidence intervals and were included in the meta-analysis. The performance of ML models varied across studies, with C-statistics ranging from 0.60 to 0.85. The pooled analysis showed that ML models had higher discriminative ability compared to LR models, with a weighted average C-statistic of 0.78 for ML models compared to 0.70 for LR models. Conclusion: Machine learning models show promise in predicting overall survival in patients with lung cancer, with superior discriminative ability compared to logistic regression models. However, further validation and standardization of ML models are needed before their widespread implementation in clinical practice. Future research should focus on addressing the limitations of the current literature, such as potential bias and heterogeneity among studies, to improve the accuracy and generalizability of ML models for predicting outcomes in patients with lung cancer. Further research and development of ML models in this field may lead to improved patient outcomes and personalized treatment strategies.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 45 条
  • [1] Afshar P, 2020, SCI REP-UK, V10, DOI 10.1038/s41598-020-69106-8
  • [2] Age, sex and race bias in automated arrhythmia detectors
    Alday, Erick A. Perez
    Rad, Ali B.
    Reyna, Matthew A.
    Sadr, Nadi
    Gu, Annie
    Li, Qiao
    Dumitru, Mircea
    Xue, Joel
    Albert, Dave
    Sameni, Reza
    Clifford, Gari D.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ELECTROCARDIOLOGY, 2022, 74 : 5 - 9
  • [3] Viral pneumonia images classification by Multiple Instance Learning: preliminary results
    Avolio, Matteo
    Fuduli, Antonio
    Vocaturo, Eugenio
    Zumpano, Ester
    [J]. IDEAS 2021: 25TH INTERNATIONAL DATABASE ENGINEERING & APPLICATIONS SYMPOSIUM, 2021, : 292 - 296
  • [4] Comparing the predictive value of neural network models to logistic regression models on the risk of death for small-cell lung cancer patients
    Bartfay, E
    Mackillop, WJ
    Pater, JL
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER CARE, 2006, 15 (02) : 115 - 124
  • [5] Machine learning improves mortality risk prediction after cardiac surgery Systematic review and meta-analysis
    Benedetto, Umberto
    Dimagli, Arnaldo
    Sinha, Shubhra
    Cocomello, Lucia
    Gibbison, Ben
    Caputo, Massimo
    Gaunt, Tom
    Lyon, Matt
    Holmes, Chris
    Angelini, Gianni D.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2022, 163 (06) : 2075 - +
  • [6] A Machine Learning Prediction Model of Respiratory Failure Within 48 Hours of Patient Admission for COVID-19: Model Development and Validation
    Bolourani, Siavash
    Brenner, Max
    Wang, Ping
    McGinn, Thomas
    Hirsch, Jamie S.
    Barnaby, Douglas
    Zanos, Theodoros P.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH, 2021, 23 (02)
  • [7] Argumentation approaches for explanaible AI in medical informatics
    Caroprese, Luciano
    Vocaturo, Eugenio
    Zumpano, Ester
    [J]. INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, 2022, 16
  • [8] Augmented Features Synergize Radiomics in Post-Operative Survival Prediction and Adjuvant Therapy Recommendation for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
    Chan, Lawrence Wing-Chi
    Ding, Tong
    Shao, Huiling
    Huang, Mohan
    Hui, William Fuk-Yuen
    Cho, William Chi-Shing
    Wong, Sze-Chuen Cesar
    Tong, Ka Wai
    Chiu, Keith Wan-Hang
    Huang, Luyu
    Zhou, Haiyu
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2022, 12
  • [9] Ethical Machine Learning in Healthcare
    Chen, Irene Y.
    Pierson, Emma
    Rose, Sherri
    Joshi, Shalmali
    Ferryman, Kadija
    Ghassemi, Marzyeh
    [J]. ANNUAL REVIEW OF BIOMEDICAL DATA SCIENCE, VOL 4, 2021, 4 : 123 - 144
  • [10] A systematic review shows no performance benefit of machine learning over logistic regression for clinical prediction models
    Christodoulou, Evangelia
    Ma, Jie
    Collins, Gary S.
    Steyerberg, Ewout W.
    Verbakel, Jan Y.
    Van Calster, Ben
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2019, 110 : 12 - 22