{"title":"P.091 合成数据可靠再现脑肿瘤原始研究数据","authors":"R. Khalaf, W. Davalan, A. Mohammad, RJ Diaz","doi":"10.1017/cjn.2024.196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Synthetic data has garnered heightened attention in contemporary research due to confidentiality barriers and its capacity to simulate variables challenging to obtain. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of synthetic data in the context of neuro-oncology research, comparing findings from two published studies with results from synthetic datasets. Methods: Two published neuro-oncology studies focusing on prognostic factors such as serum albumin and systemic inflammation scores were selected, and their methodologies were replicated using MDClone Platform to generate five synthetic datasets for each. We used Chi-Square test to assess inter-variability between synthetic datasets. Survival outcomes were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and t-test was used to determine statistical significance. Results: Findings from synthetic data consistently matched outcomes from both original articles, with serum albumin and systemc inflammation scores correlating with survival prognosis in glioblastoma and metastasis patients (p<0.05) Reported findings, demographic trends and survival outcomes showed significant similarity (P > 0.05) with synthetic datasets. Conclusions: Synthetic data consistently reproduced the statistical attributes of real patient data. Integrating synthetic data into clinical research offers excellent potential for providing accurate predictive insights without compromising patient privacy. In neuro-oncology, where patient follow-up pose challenges, the adoption of synthetic datasets can be transformative.","PeriodicalId":9571,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques","volume":"4 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"P.091 Synthetic data reliably reproduces brain tumor primary research data\",\"authors\":\"R. Khalaf, W. Davalan, A. Mohammad, RJ Diaz\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/cjn.2024.196\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Synthetic data has garnered heightened attention in contemporary research due to confidentiality barriers and its capacity to simulate variables challenging to obtain. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of synthetic data in the context of neuro-oncology research, comparing findings from two published studies with results from synthetic datasets. Methods: Two published neuro-oncology studies focusing on prognostic factors such as serum albumin and systemic inflammation scores were selected, and their methodologies were replicated using MDClone Platform to generate five synthetic datasets for each. We used Chi-Square test to assess inter-variability between synthetic datasets. Survival outcomes were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and t-test was used to determine statistical significance. Results: Findings from synthetic data consistently matched outcomes from both original articles, with serum albumin and systemc inflammation scores correlating with survival prognosis in glioblastoma and metastasis patients (p<0.05) Reported findings, demographic trends and survival outcomes showed significant similarity (P > 0.05) with synthetic datasets. Conclusions: Synthetic data consistently reproduced the statistical attributes of real patient data. Integrating synthetic data into clinical research offers excellent potential for providing accurate predictive insights without compromising patient privacy. In neuro-oncology, where patient follow-up pose challenges, the adoption of synthetic datasets can be transformative.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9571,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques\",\"volume\":\"4 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/cjn.2024.196\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cjn.2024.196","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:合成数据因其保密性和模拟难以获得的变量的能力而在当代研究中备受关注。本研究旨在评估神经肿瘤学研究中合成数据的可靠性和有效性,将两项已发表的研究结果与合成数据集的结果进行比较。研究方法我们选取了两项已发表的神经肿瘤学研究,重点关注血清白蛋白和全身炎症评分等预后因素,并使用 MDClone 平台复制了它们的方法,为每项研究生成了五个合成数据集。我们使用 Chi-Square 检验来评估合成数据集之间的变异性。我们使用 Kaplan-Meier 法评估生存结果,并使用 t 检验确定统计显著性。结果合成数据的结果与两篇原始文章的结果一致,血清白蛋白和系统炎症评分与胶质母细胞瘤和转移瘤患者合成数据集的生存预后相关(P 0.05)。结论:合成数据一致再现了真实患者数据的统计属性。将合成数据整合到临床研究中可在不损害患者隐私的情况下提供准确的预测见解。在神经肿瘤学领域,患者随访是一项挑战,采用合成数据集可以带来变革。
P.091 Synthetic data reliably reproduces brain tumor primary research data
Background: Synthetic data has garnered heightened attention in contemporary research due to confidentiality barriers and its capacity to simulate variables challenging to obtain. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of synthetic data in the context of neuro-oncology research, comparing findings from two published studies with results from synthetic datasets. Methods: Two published neuro-oncology studies focusing on prognostic factors such as serum albumin and systemic inflammation scores were selected, and their methodologies were replicated using MDClone Platform to generate five synthetic datasets for each. We used Chi-Square test to assess inter-variability between synthetic datasets. Survival outcomes were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and t-test was used to determine statistical significance. Results: Findings from synthetic data consistently matched outcomes from both original articles, with serum albumin and systemc inflammation scores correlating with survival prognosis in glioblastoma and metastasis patients (p<0.05) Reported findings, demographic trends and survival outcomes showed significant similarity (P > 0.05) with synthetic datasets. Conclusions: Synthetic data consistently reproduced the statistical attributes of real patient data. Integrating synthetic data into clinical research offers excellent potential for providing accurate predictive insights without compromising patient privacy. In neuro-oncology, where patient follow-up pose challenges, the adoption of synthetic datasets can be transformative.