中国台州利用机器学习技术降低胃癌筛查成本的可行性研究。

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
DIGITAL HEALTH Pub Date : 2024-09-05 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20552076241277713
Si-Yan Yan, Xin-Yu Fu, Shen-Ping Tang, Rong-Bin Qi, Jia-Wei Liang, Xin-Li Mao, Li-Ping Ye, Shao-Wei Li
{"title":"中国台州利用机器学习技术降低胃癌筛查成本的可行性研究。","authors":"Si-Yan Yan, Xin-Yu Fu, Shen-Ping Tang, Rong-Bin Qi, Jia-Wei Liang, Xin-Li Mao, Li-Ping Ye, Shao-Wei Li","doi":"10.1177/20552076241277713","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To optimize gastric cancer screening score and reduce screening costs using machine learning models.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included 228,634 patients from the Taizhou Gastric Cancer Screening Program. We used three machine learning models to optimize Li's gastric cancer screening score: Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM), Distributed Random Forest (DRF), and Deep Learning (DL). The performance of the binary classification models was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC) and area under the precision-recall curve (AUCPR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the binary classification model used to distinguish low-risk and moderate- to high-risk patients, the AUC in the GBM, DRF, and DL full models were 0.9994, 0.9982, and 0.9974, respectively, and the AUCPR was 0.9982, 0.9949, and 0.9918, respectively. Excluding <i>Helicobacter pylori</i> IgG antibody, pepsinogen I, and pepsinogen II, the AUC in the GBM, DRF, and DL models were 0.9932, 0.9879, and 0.9900, respectively, and the AUCPR was 0.9835, 0.9716, and 0.9752, respectively. Remodel after removing variables IgG, PGI, PGII, and G-17, the AUC in GBM, DRF, and DL was 0.8524, 0.8482, 0.8477, and AUCPR was 0.6068, 0.6008, and 0.5890, respectively. When constructing a tri-classification model, we discovered that none of the three machine learning models could effectively distinguish between patients at intermediate and high risk for gastric cancer (F1 scores in the GBM model for the low, medium and high risk: 0.9750, 0.9193, 0.5334, respectively; F1 scores in the DRF model for low, medium, and high risks: 0.9888, 0.9479, 0.6694, respectively; F1 scores in the DL model for low, medium, and high risks: 0.9812, 0.9216, 0.6394, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We concluded that gastric cancer screening indicators could be optimized when distinguishing low-risk and moderate to high-risk populations, and detecting gastrin-17 alone can achieve a good discriminative effect, thus saving huge expenditures.</p>","PeriodicalId":51333,"journal":{"name":"DIGITAL HEALTH","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11378168/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A feasibility study on utilizing machine learning technology to reduce the costs of gastric cancer screening in Taizhou, China.\",\"authors\":\"Si-Yan Yan, Xin-Yu Fu, Shen-Ping Tang, Rong-Bin Qi, Jia-Wei Liang, Xin-Li Mao, Li-Ping Ye, Shao-Wei Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20552076241277713\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To optimize gastric cancer screening score and reduce screening costs using machine learning models.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included 228,634 patients from the Taizhou Gastric Cancer Screening Program. We used three machine learning models to optimize Li's gastric cancer screening score: Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM), Distributed Random Forest (DRF), and Deep Learning (DL). The performance of the binary classification models was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC) and area under the precision-recall curve (AUCPR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the binary classification model used to distinguish low-risk and moderate- to high-risk patients, the AUC in the GBM, DRF, and DL full models were 0.9994, 0.9982, and 0.9974, respectively, and the AUCPR was 0.9982, 0.9949, and 0.9918, respectively. Excluding <i>Helicobacter pylori</i> IgG antibody, pepsinogen I, and pepsinogen II, the AUC in the GBM, DRF, and DL models were 0.9932, 0.9879, and 0.9900, respectively, and the AUCPR was 0.9835, 0.9716, and 0.9752, respectively. Remodel after removing variables IgG, PGI, PGII, and G-17, the AUC in GBM, DRF, and DL was 0.8524, 0.8482, 0.8477, and AUCPR was 0.6068, 0.6008, and 0.5890, respectively. When constructing a tri-classification model, we discovered that none of the three machine learning models could effectively distinguish between patients at intermediate and high risk for gastric cancer (F1 scores in the GBM model for the low, medium and high risk: 0.9750, 0.9193, 0.5334, respectively; F1 scores in the DRF model for low, medium, and high risks: 0.9888, 0.9479, 0.6694, respectively; F1 scores in the DL model for low, medium, and high risks: 0.9812, 0.9216, 0.6394, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We concluded that gastric cancer screening indicators could be optimized when distinguishing low-risk and moderate to high-risk populations, and detecting gastrin-17 alone can achieve a good discriminative effect, thus saving huge expenditures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"DIGITAL HEALTH\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11378168/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"DIGITAL HEALTH\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076241277713\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DIGITAL HEALTH","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076241277713","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:利用机器学习模型优化胃癌筛查评分并降低筛查成本:本研究纳入了台州市胃癌筛查项目的 228634 名患者。我们使用了三种机器学习模型来优化李女士的胃癌筛查评分:梯度提升机(GBM)、分布式随机森林(DRF)和深度学习(DL)。二元分类模型的性能使用曲线下面积(AUC)和精确度-召回曲线下面积(AUCPR)进行评估:在用于区分低风险和中高风险患者的二元分类模型中,GBM、DRF 和 DL 全模型的 AUC 分别为 0.9994、0.9982 和 0.9974,AUCPR 分别为 0.9982、0.9949 和 0.9918。剔除幽门螺杆菌 IgG 抗体、胃蛋白酶原 I 和胃蛋白酶原 II 后,GBM、DRF 和 DL 模型的 AUC 分别为 0.9932、0.9879 和 0.9900,AUCPR 分别为 0.9835、0.9716 和 0.9752。去除变量 IgG、PGI、PGII 和 G-17 后进行重塑,GBM、DRF 和 DL 的 AUC 分别为 0.8524、0.8482 和 0.8477,AUCPR 分别为 0.6068、0.6008 和 0.5890。在构建三分类模型时,我们发现三种机器学习模型都不能有效区分胃癌中、高风险患者(GBM 模型中低、中、高风险的 F1 得分分别为 0.9750、0.9193、0.5334;DRF 模型中低、中、高风险的 F1 得分分别为 0.9888、0.9494、0.988):低、中、高风险的 DRF 模型的 F1 分数分别为 0.9888、0.9479、0.6694;低、中、高风险的 DL 模型的 F1 分数分别为 0.9812、0.989、0.6694:结论:结论:胃癌筛查指标在区分低危人群和中高危人群时可以进行优化,仅检测胃泌素-17就可以达到很好的区分效果,从而节省大量开支。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A feasibility study on utilizing machine learning technology to reduce the costs of gastric cancer screening in Taizhou, China.

Aim: To optimize gastric cancer screening score and reduce screening costs using machine learning models.

Methods: This study included 228,634 patients from the Taizhou Gastric Cancer Screening Program. We used three machine learning models to optimize Li's gastric cancer screening score: Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM), Distributed Random Forest (DRF), and Deep Learning (DL). The performance of the binary classification models was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC) and area under the precision-recall curve (AUCPR).

Results: In the binary classification model used to distinguish low-risk and moderate- to high-risk patients, the AUC in the GBM, DRF, and DL full models were 0.9994, 0.9982, and 0.9974, respectively, and the AUCPR was 0.9982, 0.9949, and 0.9918, respectively. Excluding Helicobacter pylori IgG antibody, pepsinogen I, and pepsinogen II, the AUC in the GBM, DRF, and DL models were 0.9932, 0.9879, and 0.9900, respectively, and the AUCPR was 0.9835, 0.9716, and 0.9752, respectively. Remodel after removing variables IgG, PGI, PGII, and G-17, the AUC in GBM, DRF, and DL was 0.8524, 0.8482, 0.8477, and AUCPR was 0.6068, 0.6008, and 0.5890, respectively. When constructing a tri-classification model, we discovered that none of the three machine learning models could effectively distinguish between patients at intermediate and high risk for gastric cancer (F1 scores in the GBM model for the low, medium and high risk: 0.9750, 0.9193, 0.5334, respectively; F1 scores in the DRF model for low, medium, and high risks: 0.9888, 0.9479, 0.6694, respectively; F1 scores in the DL model for low, medium, and high risks: 0.9812, 0.9216, 0.6394, respectively).

Conclusion: We concluded that gastric cancer screening indicators could be optimized when distinguishing low-risk and moderate to high-risk populations, and detecting gastrin-17 alone can achieve a good discriminative effect, thus saving huge expenditures.

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
DIGITAL HEALTH
DIGITAL HEALTH Multiple-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
302
×
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