基于反事实理论的机器学习模型用于肝细胞癌患者的治疗决策

IF 4.2 3区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Journal of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Pub Date : 2024-08-30 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/JHC.S470550
Xiaoqin Wei, Fang Wang, Ying Liu, Zeyong Li, Zhong Xue, Mingyue Tang, Xiaowen Chen
{"title":"基于反事实理论的机器学习模型用于肝细胞癌患者的治疗决策","authors":"Xiaoqin Wei, Fang Wang, Ying Liu, Zeyong Li, Zhong Xue, Mingyue Tang, Xiaowen Chen","doi":"10.2147/JHC.S470550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To predict the efficacy of patients treated with hepatectomy and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) based on machine learning models using clinical and radiomics features.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Patients with HCC whose first treatment was hepatectomy or TACE from June 2016 to July 2021 were collected in the retrospective cohort study. To ensure a causal effect of treatment effect and treatment modality, perfectly matched patients were obtained according to the principle of propensity score matching and used as an independent test cohort. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to control bias for unmatched patients, and the weighted results were used as the training cohort. Clinical characteristics were selected by univariate and multivariate analysis of cox proportional hazards regression, and radiomics features were selected using correlation analysis and random survival forest. The machine learning models (Death<sub>hepatectomy</sub> and Death<sub>TACE</sub>) were constructed to predict the probability of patient death after treatment (hepatectomy and TACE) by combining clinical and radiomics features, and an optimal treatment regimen was recommended. In addition, a prognostic model was constructed to predict the survival time of all patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 418 patients with HCC who received either hepatectomy (n=267, mean age, 58 years ± 11 [standard deviation]; 228 men) or TACE (n=151, mean age, 59 years ± 13 [standard deviation]; 127 men) were recruited. After constructing the machine learning models Death<sub>hepatectomy</sub> and Death<sub>TACE</sub>, patients were divided into the hepatectomy-preferred and TACE-preferred groups. In the hepatectomy-preferred group, hepatectomy had a significantly prolonged survival time than TACE (training cohort: <i>P</i> < 0.001; testing cohort: <i>P</i> < 0.001), and vise versa for the TACE-preferred group. In addition, the prognostic model yielded high predictive capability for overall survival.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The machine learning models could predict the outcomes difference between hepatectomy and TACE, and prognostic models could predict the overall survival for HCC patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":15906,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hepatocellular Carcinoma","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11370756/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Machine Learning Model Based on Counterfactual Theory for Treatment Decision of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients.\",\"authors\":\"Xiaoqin Wei, Fang Wang, Ying Liu, Zeyong Li, Zhong Xue, Mingyue Tang, Xiaowen Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/JHC.S470550\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To predict the efficacy of patients treated with hepatectomy and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) based on machine learning models using clinical and radiomics features.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Patients with HCC whose first treatment was hepatectomy or TACE from June 2016 to July 2021 were collected in the retrospective cohort study. To ensure a causal effect of treatment effect and treatment modality, perfectly matched patients were obtained according to the principle of propensity score matching and used as an independent test cohort. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to control bias for unmatched patients, and the weighted results were used as the training cohort. Clinical characteristics were selected by univariate and multivariate analysis of cox proportional hazards regression, and radiomics features were selected using correlation analysis and random survival forest. The machine learning models (Death<sub>hepatectomy</sub> and Death<sub>TACE</sub>) were constructed to predict the probability of patient death after treatment (hepatectomy and TACE) by combining clinical and radiomics features, and an optimal treatment regimen was recommended. In addition, a prognostic model was constructed to predict the survival time of all patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 418 patients with HCC who received either hepatectomy (n=267, mean age, 58 years ± 11 [standard deviation]; 228 men) or TACE (n=151, mean age, 59 years ± 13 [standard deviation]; 127 men) were recruited. After constructing the machine learning models Death<sub>hepatectomy</sub> and Death<sub>TACE</sub>, patients were divided into the hepatectomy-preferred and TACE-preferred groups. In the hepatectomy-preferred group, hepatectomy had a significantly prolonged survival time than TACE (training cohort: <i>P</i> < 0.001; testing cohort: <i>P</i> < 0.001), and vise versa for the TACE-preferred group. In addition, the prognostic model yielded high predictive capability for overall survival.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The machine learning models could predict the outcomes difference between hepatectomy and TACE, and prognostic models could predict the overall survival for HCC patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15906,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hepatocellular Carcinoma\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11370756/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hepatocellular Carcinoma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/JHC.S470550\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hepatocellular Carcinoma","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JHC.S470550","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:基于使用临床和放射组学特征的机器学习模型,预测接受肝切除术和经动脉化疗栓塞术(TACE)治疗的患者的疗效:回顾性队列研究收集了2016年6月至2021年7月期间首次治疗为肝切除术或TACE的HCC患者。为确保治疗效果与治疗方式之间的因果关系,根据倾向评分匹配原则获得完全匹配的患者,并将其作为独立的试验队列。为控制未匹配患者的偏倚,采用了治疗的逆概率加权,并将加权结果作为训练队列。临床特征通过单变量和多变量cox比例危险回归分析进行筛选,放射组学特征通过相关性分析和随机生存森林进行筛选。结合临床和放射组学特征,构建了机器学习模型(Deathhepatectomy 和 DeathTACE)来预测患者在治疗(肝切除术和 TACE)后的死亡概率,并推荐最佳治疗方案。此外,还构建了一个预后模型来预测所有患者的生存时间:共招募了418名接受肝切除术(n=267,平均年龄为58岁±11岁[标准差];228名男性)或TACE(n=151,平均年龄为59岁±13岁[标准差];127名男性)的HCC患者。在构建机器学习模型Deathhepatectomy和DeathTACE后,患者被分为肝切除术首选组和TACE首选组。在肝切除术首选组中,肝切除术的生存时间明显长于TACE(训练组:P < 0.001;测试组:P < 0.001),反之亦然。此外,预后模型对总生存期也有很高的预测能力:机器学习模型可以预测肝切除术和 TACE 的结果差异,预后模型可以预测 HCC 患者的总生存期。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Machine Learning Model Based on Counterfactual Theory for Treatment Decision of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients.

Purpose: To predict the efficacy of patients treated with hepatectomy and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) based on machine learning models using clinical and radiomics features.

Patients and methods: Patients with HCC whose first treatment was hepatectomy or TACE from June 2016 to July 2021 were collected in the retrospective cohort study. To ensure a causal effect of treatment effect and treatment modality, perfectly matched patients were obtained according to the principle of propensity score matching and used as an independent test cohort. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to control bias for unmatched patients, and the weighted results were used as the training cohort. Clinical characteristics were selected by univariate and multivariate analysis of cox proportional hazards regression, and radiomics features were selected using correlation analysis and random survival forest. The machine learning models (Deathhepatectomy and DeathTACE) were constructed to predict the probability of patient death after treatment (hepatectomy and TACE) by combining clinical and radiomics features, and an optimal treatment regimen was recommended. In addition, a prognostic model was constructed to predict the survival time of all patients.

Results: A total of 418 patients with HCC who received either hepatectomy (n=267, mean age, 58 years ± 11 [standard deviation]; 228 men) or TACE (n=151, mean age, 59 years ± 13 [standard deviation]; 127 men) were recruited. After constructing the machine learning models Deathhepatectomy and DeathTACE, patients were divided into the hepatectomy-preferred and TACE-preferred groups. In the hepatectomy-preferred group, hepatectomy had a significantly prolonged survival time than TACE (training cohort: P < 0.001; testing cohort: P < 0.001), and vise versa for the TACE-preferred group. In addition, the prognostic model yielded high predictive capability for overall survival.

Conclusion: The machine learning models could predict the outcomes difference between hepatectomy and TACE, and prognostic models could predict the overall survival for HCC patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
2.40%
发文量
108
审稿时长
16 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