Which model is better in predicting the survival of laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma?: Comparison of the random survival forest based on machine learning algorithms to Cox regression: analyses based on SEER database

被引:6
作者
Sun, Haili [1 ]
Wu, Shuangshuang [1 ]
Li, Shaoxiao [1 ]
Jiang, Xiaohua [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Wenzhou Med Univ, Ping Yang Hosp, Wenzhou, Peoples R China
[2] Zhejiang Univ, Sir Run Run Shaw Hosp, Sch Med, Hangzhou, Peoples R China
关键词
laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma; machine learning; prediction model; SEER; TIME; DIAGNOSIS; UPDATE; HEAD;
D O I
10.1097/MD.0000000000033144
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Prediction of postoperative survival for laryngeal carcinoma patients is very important. This study attempts to demonstrate the utilization of the random survival forest (RSF) and Cox regression model to predict overall survival of laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC) and compare their performance. A total of 8677 patients diagnosed with LSCC from 2004 to 2015 were obtained from surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database. Multivariate imputation by chained equations was applied to filling the missing data. Lasso regression algorithm was conducted to find potential predictors. RSF and Cox regression were used to develop the survival prediction models. Harrell's concordance index (C-index), area under the curve (AUC), Brier score, and calibration plot were used to evaluate the predictive performance of the 2 models. For 3-year survival prediction, the C-index in training set were 0.74 (0.011) and 0.84 (0.013) for Cox and RSF respectively. For 5-year survival prediction, the C-index in training set were 0.75 (0.022) and 0.80 (0.011) for Cox and RSF respectively. Similar results were found in validation set. The AUC were 0.795 for RSF and 0.715 for Cox in the training set while the AUC were 0.765 for RSF and 0.705 for Cox in the validation set. The prediction error curves for each model based on Brier score showed the RSF model had lower prediction errors both in training group and validation group. What's more, the calibration curve displayed similar results of 2 models both in training set and validation set. The performance of RSF model were better than Cox regression model. The RSF algorithms provide a relatively better alternatives to be of clinical use for estimating the survival probability of LSCC patients.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 37 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], DAT COD US THIS STUD
  • [2] Comparison of methods for early-readmission prediction in a high-dimensional heterogeneous covariates and time-to-event outcome framework
    Bussy, Simon
    Veil, Raphael
    Looten, Vincent
    Burgun, Anita
    Gaiffas, Stephane
    Guilloux, Agathe
    Ranque, Brigitte
    Jannot, Anne-Sophie
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2019, 19 (1)
  • [3] Collins GS, 2015, ANN INTERN MED, V162, P55, DOI [10.1136/bmj.g7594, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.11.010, 10.7326/M14-0697, 10.1038/bjc.2014.639, 10.7326/M14-0698, 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.11.025, 10.1186/s12916-014-0241-z, 10.1002/bjs.9736]
  • [4] NOVEL HEAD AND NECK CANCER SURVIVAL ANALYSIS APPROACH: RANDOM SURVIVAL FORESTS VERSUS COX PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS REGRESSION
    Datema, Frank R.
    Moya, Ana
    Krause, Peter
    Baeck, Thomas
    Willmes, Lars
    Langeveld, Ton
    de Jong, Robert J. Baatenburg
    Blom, Henk M.
    [J]. HEAD AND NECK-JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENCES AND SPECIALTIES OF THE HEAD AND NECK, 2012, 34 (01): : 50 - 58
  • [5] Machine Learning in Medicine
    Deo, Rahul C.
    [J]. CIRCULATION, 2015, 132 (20) : 1920 - 1930
  • [6] Random Survival Forest in practice: a method for modelling complex metabolomics data in time to event analysis
    Dietrich, Stefan
    Floegel, Anna
    Troll, Martina
    Kuehn, Tilman
    Rathmann, Wolfgang
    Peters, Anette
    Sookthai, Disorn
    von Bergen, Martin
    Kaaks, Rudolf
    Adamski, Jerzy
    Prehn, Cornelia
    Boeing, Heiner
    Schulze, Matthias B.
    Illig, Thomas
    Pischon, Tobias
    Knueppel, Sven
    Wang-Sattler, Rui
    Drogan, Dagmar
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2016, 45 (05) : 1406 - 1420
  • [7] Comparison of the Tree-Based Machine Learning Algorithms to Cox Regression in Predicting the Survival of Oral and Pharyngeal Cancers: Analyses Based on SEER Database
    Du, Mi
    Haag, Dandara G.
    Lynch, John W.
    Mittinty, Murthy N.
    [J]. CANCERS, 2020, 12 (10) : 1 - 16
  • [8] Use of Larynx-Preservation Strategies in the Treatment of Laryngeal Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update Summary
    Forastiere, Arlene A.
    Ismaila, Nofisat
    Wolf, Gregory T.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY PRACTICE, 2018, 14 (02) : 123 - +
  • [9] Confidence scores for prediction models
    Gerds, Thomas A.
    van de Wiel, Mark A.
    [J]. BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 2011, 53 (02) : 259 - 274
  • [10] Statistical primer: multivariable regression considerations and pitfalls
    Grant, Stuart W.
    Hickey, Graeme L.
    Head, Stuart J.
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CARDIO-THORACIC SURGERY, 2019, 55 (02) : 179 - 185