Yiyao Liu, Huitong Ni, Teng Zhi, Ziqi Zhao, Xiaoxi Zeng, Ming Hu, Zhiang Wu
{"title":"基于机器学习建立抗抑郁药疗效预测模型","authors":"Yiyao Liu, Huitong Ni, Teng Zhi, Ziqi Zhao, Xiaoxi Zeng, Ming Hu, Zhiang Wu","doi":"10.54844/hd.2024.0012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Establishing a model can accurately predict the depressive patient’s response to different drugs, thereby providing \npersonalized treatment plans to improve treatment outcomes. \nMethods: Depressive patients who have taken Paroxetine hydrochloride or Venlafaxine hydrochloride or Agomelatine at a \nhospital in Sichuan Province are the subjects. By analyzing their medical records, medication histories, and basic information, \nan predictive model is constructed to predict the efficacy of antidepressant medications based on eXtreme Gradient Boosting. \nResults: For the prediction model of Paroxetine hydrochloride, 52 variables selected by the model were used to construct an \nefficient predictive model. In the training set, the model achieved an AUC value of 0.6354 and a K-S value of 0.1944, indicating \ngood performance in correctly classifying positive and negative samples and distinguishing different predictive probability \nthresholds. In the validation set, the AUC was 0.6065, and K-S was 0.1847, confirming the model’s effectiveness on new data. \nCompared to actual clinical data, the efficacy of sertraline hydrochloride was approximately 61.9%. The model’s predictions \naligned well with real-world data, reinforcing its reliability and practicality. As for venlafaxine hydrochloride, the model achieved \nan AUC of 0.5745 and K-S of 0.149 on the training set, while the validation set showed an AUC of 0.5298 and K-S of 0.0597. \nThese results suggest that the model’s performance in predicting venlafaxine hydrochloride is mediocre. Comparing with \nclinical data, the efficacy of venlafaxine hydrochloride was approximately 68.9%, indicating a discrepancy between the model’s \npredictions and actual outcomes, possibly due to the uneven distribution of the training set samples. As for agomelatine, due \nto the insufficient number of agomelatine samples collected at the sample hospital (less than 200), an effective predictive model \ncould not be established. \nConclusion: In clinical practice, doctors can make more informed treatment decisions and achieve personalized antidepressant \ntherapy with the assistance of this model. \nKey words: predictive model, machine learning, antidepressant efficacy, depressive patients, clinical practice","PeriodicalId":430023,"journal":{"name":"Health Decision","volume":"12 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Establishment of a predictive model for antidepressant efficacy based on machine learning\",\"authors\":\"Yiyao Liu, Huitong Ni, Teng Zhi, Ziqi Zhao, Xiaoxi Zeng, Ming Hu, Zhiang Wu\",\"doi\":\"10.54844/hd.2024.0012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: Establishing a model can accurately predict the depressive patient’s response to different drugs, thereby providing \\npersonalized treatment plans to improve treatment outcomes. \\nMethods: Depressive patients who have taken Paroxetine hydrochloride or Venlafaxine hydrochloride or Agomelatine at a \\nhospital in Sichuan Province are the subjects. By analyzing their medical records, medication histories, and basic information, \\nan predictive model is constructed to predict the efficacy of antidepressant medications based on eXtreme Gradient Boosting. \\nResults: For the prediction model of Paroxetine hydrochloride, 52 variables selected by the model were used to construct an \\nefficient predictive model. In the training set, the model achieved an AUC value of 0.6354 and a K-S value of 0.1944, indicating \\ngood performance in correctly classifying positive and negative samples and distinguishing different predictive probability \\nthresholds. In the validation set, the AUC was 0.6065, and K-S was 0.1847, confirming the model’s effectiveness on new data. \\nCompared to actual clinical data, the efficacy of sertraline hydrochloride was approximately 61.9%. The model’s predictions \\naligned well with real-world data, reinforcing its reliability and practicality. As for venlafaxine hydrochloride, the model achieved \\nan AUC of 0.5745 and K-S of 0.149 on the training set, while the validation set showed an AUC of 0.5298 and K-S of 0.0597. \\nThese results suggest that the model’s performance in predicting venlafaxine hydrochloride is mediocre. Comparing with \\nclinical data, the efficacy of venlafaxine hydrochloride was approximately 68.9%, indicating a discrepancy between the model’s \\npredictions and actual outcomes, possibly due to the uneven distribution of the training set samples. As for agomelatine, due \\nto the insufficient number of agomelatine samples collected at the sample hospital (less than 200), an effective predictive model \\ncould not be established. \\nConclusion: In clinical practice, doctors can make more informed treatment decisions and achieve personalized antidepressant \\ntherapy with the assistance of this model. \\nKey words: predictive model, machine learning, antidepressant efficacy, depressive patients, clinical practice\",\"PeriodicalId\":430023,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Decision\",\"volume\":\"12 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Decision\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54844/hd.2024.0012\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Decision","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54844/hd.2024.0012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Establishment of a predictive model for antidepressant efficacy based on machine learning
Objective: Establishing a model can accurately predict the depressive patient’s response to different drugs, thereby providing
personalized treatment plans to improve treatment outcomes.
Methods: Depressive patients who have taken Paroxetine hydrochloride or Venlafaxine hydrochloride or Agomelatine at a
hospital in Sichuan Province are the subjects. By analyzing their medical records, medication histories, and basic information,
an predictive model is constructed to predict the efficacy of antidepressant medications based on eXtreme Gradient Boosting.
Results: For the prediction model of Paroxetine hydrochloride, 52 variables selected by the model were used to construct an
efficient predictive model. In the training set, the model achieved an AUC value of 0.6354 and a K-S value of 0.1944, indicating
good performance in correctly classifying positive and negative samples and distinguishing different predictive probability
thresholds. In the validation set, the AUC was 0.6065, and K-S was 0.1847, confirming the model’s effectiveness on new data.
Compared to actual clinical data, the efficacy of sertraline hydrochloride was approximately 61.9%. The model’s predictions
aligned well with real-world data, reinforcing its reliability and practicality. As for venlafaxine hydrochloride, the model achieved
an AUC of 0.5745 and K-S of 0.149 on the training set, while the validation set showed an AUC of 0.5298 and K-S of 0.0597.
These results suggest that the model’s performance in predicting venlafaxine hydrochloride is mediocre. Comparing with
clinical data, the efficacy of venlafaxine hydrochloride was approximately 68.9%, indicating a discrepancy between the model’s
predictions and actual outcomes, possibly due to the uneven distribution of the training set samples. As for agomelatine, due
to the insufficient number of agomelatine samples collected at the sample hospital (less than 200), an effective predictive model
could not be established.
Conclusion: In clinical practice, doctors can make more informed treatment decisions and achieve personalized antidepressant
therapy with the assistance of this model.
Key words: predictive model, machine learning, antidepressant efficacy, depressive patients, clinical practice