Machine learning approaches for prediction of early death among lung cancer patients with bone metastases using routine clinical characteristics: An analysis of 19,887 patients

被引:23
作者
Cui, Yunpeng [1 ]
Shi, Xuedong [1 ]
Wang, Shengjie [2 ]
Qin, Yong [3 ]
Wang, Bailin [4 ]
Che, Xiaotong [5 ]
Lei, Mingxing [6 ,7 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Peking Univ First Hosp, Dept Orthoped Surg, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Shanghai Peoples Hosp 6, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[3] Harbin Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 2, Dept Joint & Sports Med Surg, Harbin, Peoples R China
[4] Chinese Peoples Liberat Army Gen Hosp, Hainan Hosp, Dept Thorac Surg, Sanya, Peoples R China
[5] Hainan Canc Hosp, Dept Evaluat Off, Haikou, Peoples R China
[6] Peoples Liberat Army Gen Hosp, Hainan Hosp, Dept Orthoped Surg, Sanya, Peoples R China
[7] Chinese PLA Med Sch, Beijing, Peoples R China
[8] Chinese Peoples Liberat Army Gen Hosp, Natl Clin Res Ctr Orthoped Sports Med & Rehabil, Beijing, Peoples R China
关键词
lung cancer; bone metastasis; machine learning; mortality; clinical decision-making; model explainability; PROGNOSTIC-FACTORS; SURVIVAL; STABILIZATION; SCORE;
D O I
10.3389/fpubh.2022.1019168
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
PurposeBone is one of the most common sites for the spread of malignant tumors. Patients with bone metastases whose prognosis was shorter than 3 months (early death) were considered as surgical contraindications. However, the information currently available in the literature limits our capacity to assess the risk likelihood of 3 month mortality. As a result, the study's objective is to create an accurate prediction model utilizing machine-learning techniques to predict 3 month mortality specifically among lung cancer patients with bone metastases according to easily available clinical data. MethodsThis study enrolled 19,887 lung cancer patients with bone metastases between 2010 and 2018 from a large oncologic database in the United States. According to a ratio of 8:2, the entire patient cohort was randomly assigned to a training (n = 15881, 80%) and validation (n = 4,006, 20%) group. In the training group, prediction models were trained and optimized using six approaches, including logistic regression, XGBoosting machine, random forest, neural network, gradient boosting machine, and decision tree. There were 13 metrics, including the Brier score, calibration slope, intercept-in-large, area under the curve (AUC), and sensitivity, used to assess the model's prediction performance in the validation group. In each metric, the best prediction effectiveness was assigned six points, while the worst was given one point. The model with the highest sum score of the 13 measures was optimal. The model's explainability was performed using the local interpretable model-agnostic explanation (LIME) according to the optimal model. Predictor importance was assessed using H2O automatic machine learning. Risk stratification was also evaluated based on the optimal threshold. ResultsAmong all recruited patients, the 3 month mortality was 48.5%. Twelve variables, including age, primary site, histology, race, sex, tumor (T) stage, node (N) stage, brain metastasis, liver metastasis, cancer-directed surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy, were significantly associated with 3 month mortality based on multivariate analysis, and these variables were included for developing prediction models. With the highest sum score of all the measurements, the gradient boosting machine approach outperformed all the other models (62 points), followed by the XGBooting machine approach (59 points) and logistic regression (53). The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.820 (95% confident interval [CI]: 0.807-0.833), 0.820 (95% CI: 0.807-0.833), and 0.815 (95% CI: 0.801-0.828), respectively, calibration slope was 0.97, 0.95, and 0.96, respectively, and accuracy was all 0.772. Explainability of models was conducted to rank the predictors and visualize their contributions to an individual's mortality outcome. The top four important predictors in the population according to H2O automatic machine learning were chemotherapy, followed by liver metastasis, radiation, and brain metastasis. Compared to patients in the low-risk group, patients in the high-risk group were more than three times the odds of dying within 3 months (P < 0.001). ConclusionsUsing machine learning techniques, this study offers a number of models, and the optimal model is found after thoroughly assessing and contrasting the prediction performance of each model. The optimal model can be a pragmatic risk prediction tool and is capable of identifying lung cancer patients with bone metastases who are at high risk for 3 month mortality, informing risk counseling, and aiding clinical treatment decision-making. It is better advised for patients in the high-risk group to have radiotherapy alone, the best supportive care, or minimally invasive procedures like cementoplasty.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 32 条
  • [1] Surgical treatment of bone metastasis from osteophilic cancer. Results in 401 peripheral and spinal locations
    Bouthors, Charlie
    Laumonerie, Pierre
    Crenn, Vincent
    Prost, Solene
    Blondel, Benjamin
    Fuentes, Stephane
    Court, Charles
    Mazel, Christian
    Charles, Yann-Philippe
    Sailhan, Frederic
    Bonnevialle, Paul
    [J]. ORTHOPAEDICS & TRAUMATOLOGY-SURGERY & RESEARCH, 2022, 108 (04)
  • [2] The Clinical Characteristics and Prognostic Nomogram for Head and Neck Cancer Patients with Bone Metastasis
    Chi, Changxing
    Fan, Zhiyi
    Yang, Binbin
    Sun, He
    Zheng, Zengpai
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY, 2021, 2021
  • [3] Cui YP, 2020, CLIN SPINE SURG, V33, P296, DOI 10.1097/BSD.0000000000001031
  • [4] da Silva Gustavo Telles, 2019, Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, V20, P45
  • [5] Clinically applicable deep learning for diagnosis and referral in retinal disease
    De Fauw, Jeffrey
    Ledsam, Joseph R.
    Romera-Paredes, Bernardino
    Nikolov, Stanislav
    Tomasev, Nenad
    Blackwell, Sam
    Askham, Harry
    Glorot, Xavier
    O'Donoghue, Brendan
    Visentin, Daniel
    van den Driessche, George
    Lakshminarayanan, Balaji
    Meyer, Clemens
    Mackinder, Faith
    Bouton, Simon
    Ayoub, Kareem
    Chopra, Reena
    King, Dominic
    Karthikesalingam, Alan
    Hughes, Cian O.
    Raine, Rosalind
    Hughes, Julian
    Sim, Dawn A.
    Egan, Catherine
    Tufail, Adnan
    Montgomery, Hugh
    Hassabis, Demis
    Rees, Geraint
    Back, Trevor
    Khaw, Peng T.
    Suleyman, Mustafa
    Cornebise, Julien
    Keane, Pearse A.
    Ronneberger, Olaf
    [J]. NATURE MEDICINE, 2018, 24 (09) : 1342 - +
  • [6] Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations for Classification of Lymph Node Metastases
    de Sousa, Iam Palatnik
    Bernardes Rebuzzi Vellasco, Marley Maria
    da Silva, Eduardo Costa
    [J]. SENSORS, 2019, 19 (13)
  • [7] Artificial intelligence in cancer research, diagnosis and therapy
    Elemento, Olivier
    Leslie, Christina
    Lundin, Johan
    Tourassi, Georgia
    [J]. NATURE REVIEWS CANCER, 2021, 21 (12) : 747 - 752
  • [8] The role of whole-body bone scanning and clinical factors in detecting bone metastases in patients with non-small cell lung cancer
    Erturan, S
    Yaman, M
    Aydin, G
    Uzel, I
    Müsellim, B
    Kaynak, K
    [J]. CHEST, 2005, 127 (02) : 449 - 454
  • [9] Machine Learning for Early Lung Cancer Identification Using Routine Clinical and Laboratory Data
    Gould, Michael K.
    Huang, Brian Z.
    Tammemagi, Martin C.
    Kinar, Yaron
    Shiff, Ron
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2021, 204 (04) : 445 - 453
  • [10] A guide to machine learning for biologists
    Greener, Joe G.
    Kandathil, Shaun M.
    Moffat, Lewis
    Jones, David T.
    [J]. NATURE REVIEWS MOLECULAR CELL BIOLOGY, 2022, 23 (01) : 40 - 55