Development of robust artificial neural networks for prediction of 5-year survival in bladder cancer

被引:21
作者
Bhambhvani, Hriday P. [1 ]
Zamora, Alvaro [2 ]
Shkolyar, Eugene [1 ]
Prado, Kris [1 ]
Greenberg, Daniel R. [1 ]
Kasman, Alex M. [1 ]
Liao, Joseph [1 ]
Shah, Sumit [3 ]
Srinivas, Sandy [3 ]
Skinner, Eila C. [1 ]
Shah, Jay B. [1 ]
机构
[1] Stanford Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Urol, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[2] Stanford Univ, Dept Phys, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[3] Stanford Univ, Med Ctr, Div Med Oncol, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
关键词
Survival; Cystectomy; 5-year; Urothelial; Carcinoma; RADICAL CYSTECTOMY; RECURRENCE; RISK;
D O I
10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.05.009
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: When exploring survival outcomes for patients with bladder cancer, most studies rely on conventional statistical methods such as proportional hazards models. Given the successful application of machine learning to handle big data in many disciplines outside of medicine, we sought to determine if machine learning could be used to improve our ability to predict survival in bladder cancer patients. We compare the performance of artificial neural networks (ANN), a type of machine learning algorithm, with that of multivariable Cox proportional hazards (CPH) models in the prediction of 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with bladder cancer. Subjects and methods: The National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) 18 program database was queried to identify adult patients with bladder cancer diagnosed between 1995 and 2010, yielding 161,227 patients who met our inclusion criteria. ANNs were trained and tested on an 80/20 split of the dataset. Multivariable CPH models were developed in parallel. Variables used for prediction included age, sex, race, grade, SEER stage, tumor size, lymph node involvement, degree of extension, and surgery received. The primary outcomes were 5-year DSS and 5-year OS. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was conducted, and ANN models were tested for calibration. Results: The area under the curve for the ANN models was 0.81 for the OS model and 0.80 for the DSS model. Area under the curve for the CPH models was 0.70 for OS and 0.81 for DSS. The ANN OS model achieved a calibration slope of 1.03 and a calibration intercept of - 0.04, while the ANN DSS model achieved a calibration slope of 0.99 and a calibration intercept of - 0.04. Conclusions: Machine learning algorithms can improve our ability to predict bladder cancer prognosis. Compared to CPH models, ANNs predicted OS more accurately and DSS with similar accuracy. Given the inherent limitations of administrative datasets, machine learning may allow for optimal interpretation of the complex data they contain. (C) 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.Y
引用
收藏
页码:193.e7 / 193.e12
页数:6
相关论文
共 27 条
  • [1] Artificial neural networks for diagnosis and survival prediction in colon cancer
    Ahmed, Farid E.
    [J]. MOLECULAR CANCER, 2005, 4 (1)
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2016, Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program
  • [3] Big Data and machine learning in radiation oncology: State of the art and future prospects
    Bibault, Jean-Emmanuel
    Giraud, Philippe
    Burgun, Anita
    [J]. CANCER LETTERS, 2016, 382 (01) : 110 - 117
  • [4] Postoperative nomogram predicting risk of recurrence after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer
    Bochner, Bernard H.
    Dalbagni, Guido
    Kattan, Michael W.
    Fearn, Paul
    Vora, Kinjal
    Seo, Hee Song
    Zoref, Lauren
    Abol-Enein, Hassan
    Ghoneim, Mohamed A.
    Bochner, Bernard H.
    Dalbagni, Guido
    Scardino, Peter T.
    Bajorin, Dean
    Skinner, Donald G.
    Stein, John P.
    Miranda, Gus
    Gschwend, Juergen E.
    Volkmer, Bjoern G.
    Hautmann, Richard E.
    Chang, Sam
    Cookson, Michael
    Smith, Joseph A.
    Thalman, George
    Studer, Urs E.
    Lee, Cheryl T.
    Montie, James
    Wood, David
    Puigvert, Fundacio
    Palou, Juan
    Fradet, Yyes
    LaCombe, Louis
    Simard, Pierre
    Schoenberg, Mark P.
    Lerner, Seth
    Vazina, Amnon
    Bassi, PierFrancesco
    Murai, Masaru
    Kikuchi, Eiji
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2006, 24 (24) : 3967 - 3972
  • [5] Cruz JA, 2006, CANCER INFORM, V2, P59
  • [6] Dankers F.J.W.M., 2019, FUNDAMENTALS CLIN DA
  • [7] Diagnostic Classification of Cystoscopic Images Using Deep Convolutional Neural Networks
    Eminaga, Okyaz
    Eminaga, Nurettin
    Semjonow, Axel
    Breil, Bernhard
    [J]. JCO CLINICAL CANCER INFORMATICS, 2018, 2 : 1 - 8
  • [8] Machine learning models for predicting post-cystectomy recurrence and survival in bladder cancer patients
    Hasnain, Zaki
    Mason, Jeremy
    Gill, Karanvir
    Miranda, Gus
    Gill, Inderbir S.
    Kuhn, Peter
    Newton, Paul K.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2019, 14 (02):
  • [9] Machine learning predicts individual cancer patient responses to therapeutic drugs with high accuracy
    Huang, Cai
    Clayton, Evan A.
    Matyunina, Lilya, V
    McDonald, L. DeEtte
    Benigno, Benedict B.
    Vannberg, Fredrik
    McDonald, John F.
    [J]. SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2018, 8
  • [10] Jeon Seung Hyun, 2005, Cancer Res Treat, V37, P48, DOI 10.4143/crt.2005.37.1.48