Comparing the Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence Models in Predicting Ovarian Cancer Survival: A Systematic Review

IF 1.5 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Cancer reports Pub Date : 2025-03-19 DOI:10.1002/cnr2.70138
Farkhondeh Asadi, Milad Rahimi, Nahid Ramezanghorbani, Sohrab Almasi
{"title":"Comparing the Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence Models in Predicting Ovarian Cancer Survival: A Systematic Review","authors":"Farkhondeh Asadi,&nbsp;Milad Rahimi,&nbsp;Nahid Ramezanghorbani,&nbsp;Sohrab Almasi","doi":"10.1002/cnr2.70138","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>This systematic review investigates the use of machine learning (ML) algorithms in predicting survival outcomes for ovarian cancer (OC) patients. Key prognostic endpoints, including overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and treatment response prediction (TRP), are examined to evaluate the effectiveness of these algorithms and identify significant features that influence predictive accuracy.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Recent Findings</h3>\n \n <p>A thorough search of four major databases—PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane—resulted in 2400 articles published within the last decade, with 32 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Notably, most publications emerged after 2021. Commonly used algorithms for survival prediction included random forest, support vector machines, logistic regression, XGBoost, and various deep learning models. Evaluation metrics such as area under the curve (AUC) (18 studies), concordance index (C-index) (11 studies), and accuracy (11 studies) were frequently employed. Age at diagnosis, tumor stage, CA-125 levels, and treatment-related factors were consistently highlighted as significant predictors, emphasizing their relevance in OC prognosis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>ML models demonstrate considerable potential for predicting OC survival outcomes; however, challenges persist regarding model accuracy and interpretability. Incorporating diverse data types—such as clinical, imaging, and molecular datasets—holds promise for enhancing predictive capabilities. Future advancements will depend on integrating heterogeneous data sources with multimodal ML approaches, which are crucial for improving prognostic precision in OC.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":9440,"journal":{"name":"Cancer reports","volume":"8 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cnr2.70138","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cnr2.70138","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

This systematic review investigates the use of machine learning (ML) algorithms in predicting survival outcomes for ovarian cancer (OC) patients. Key prognostic endpoints, including overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and treatment response prediction (TRP), are examined to evaluate the effectiveness of these algorithms and identify significant features that influence predictive accuracy.

Recent Findings

A thorough search of four major databases—PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane—resulted in 2400 articles published within the last decade, with 32 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Notably, most publications emerged after 2021. Commonly used algorithms for survival prediction included random forest, support vector machines, logistic regression, XGBoost, and various deep learning models. Evaluation metrics such as area under the curve (AUC) (18 studies), concordance index (C-index) (11 studies), and accuracy (11 studies) were frequently employed. Age at diagnosis, tumor stage, CA-125 levels, and treatment-related factors were consistently highlighted as significant predictors, emphasizing their relevance in OC prognosis.

Conclusion

ML models demonstrate considerable potential for predicting OC survival outcomes; however, challenges persist regarding model accuracy and interpretability. Incorporating diverse data types—such as clinical, imaging, and molecular datasets—holds promise for enhancing predictive capabilities. Future advancements will depend on integrating heterogeneous data sources with multimodal ML approaches, which are crucial for improving prognostic precision in OC.

Abstract Image

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cancer reports
Cancer reports Medicine-Oncology
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
5.90%
发文量
160
审稿时长
17 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信