将人工智能纳入泌尿外科:有监督的机器学习算法在预测前列腺切除术后生化复发方面比nomogram更有优势。

The Prostate Pub Date : 2022-02-01 Epub Date: 2021-12-02 DOI:10.1002/pros.24272
Yu Guang Tan, Andrew H S Fang, Jay K S Lim, Farhan Khalid, Kenneth Chen, Henry S S Ho, John S P Yuen, Hong Hong Huang, Kae Jack Tay
{"title":"将人工智能纳入泌尿外科:有监督的机器学习算法在预测前列腺切除术后生化复发方面比nomogram更有优势。","authors":"Yu Guang Tan,&nbsp;Andrew H S Fang,&nbsp;Jay K S Lim,&nbsp;Farhan Khalid,&nbsp;Kenneth Chen,&nbsp;Henry S S Ho,&nbsp;John S P Yuen,&nbsp;Hong Hong Huang,&nbsp;Kae Jack Tay","doi":"10.1002/pros.24272","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>After radical prostatectomy (RP), one-third of patients will experience biochemical recurrence (BCR), which is associated with subsequent metastasis and cancer-specific mortality. We employed machine learning (ML) algorithms to predict BCR after RP, and compare them with traditional regression models and nomograms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Utilizing a prospective Uro-oncology registry, 18 clinicopathological parameters of 1130 consecutive patients who underwent RP (2009-2018) were recorded, yielding over 20,000 data points for analysis. The data set was split into a 70:30 ratio for training and validation. Three ML models: Naïve Bayes (NB), random forest (RF), and support vector machine (SVM) were studied, and compared with traditional regression models and nomograms (Kattan, CAPSURE, John Hopkins [JHH]) to predict BCR at 1, 3, and 5 years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Over a median follow-up of 70.0 months, 176 (15.6%) developed BCR, at a median time of 16.0 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 11.0-26.0). Multivariate analyses demonstrated strongest association of BCR with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (p: 0.015), positive surgical margins (p < 0.001), extraprostatic extension (p: 0.002), seminal vesicle invasion (p: 0.004), and grade group (p < 0.001). The 3 ML models demonstrated good prediction of BCR at 1, 3, and 5 years, with the area under curves (AUC) of NB at 0.894, 0.876, and 0.894, RF at 0.846, 0.875, and 0.888, and SVM at 0.835, 0.850, and 0.855, respectively. All models demonstrated (1) robust accuracy (>0.82), (2) good calibration with minimal overfitting, (3) longitudinal consistency across the three time points, and (4) inter-model validity. The ML models were comparable to traditional regression analyses (AUC: 0.797, 0.848, and 0.862) and outperformed the three nomograms: Kattan (AUC: 0.815, 0.798, and 0.799), JHH (AUC: 0.820, 0.757, and 0.750) and CAPSURE nomograms (AUC: 0.706, 0.720, and 0.749) (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Supervised ML algorithms can deliver accurate performances and outperform nomograms in predicting BCR after RP. This may facilitate tailored care provisions by identifying high-risk patients who will benefit from multimodal therapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":501684,"journal":{"name":"The Prostate","volume":" ","pages":"298-305"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incorporating artificial intelligence in urology: Supervised machine learning algorithms demonstrate comparative advantage over nomograms in predicting biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy.\",\"authors\":\"Yu Guang Tan,&nbsp;Andrew H S Fang,&nbsp;Jay K S Lim,&nbsp;Farhan Khalid,&nbsp;Kenneth Chen,&nbsp;Henry S S Ho,&nbsp;John S P Yuen,&nbsp;Hong Hong Huang,&nbsp;Kae Jack Tay\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pros.24272\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>After radical prostatectomy (RP), one-third of patients will experience biochemical recurrence (BCR), which is associated with subsequent metastasis and cancer-specific mortality. We employed machine learning (ML) algorithms to predict BCR after RP, and compare them with traditional regression models and nomograms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Utilizing a prospective Uro-oncology registry, 18 clinicopathological parameters of 1130 consecutive patients who underwent RP (2009-2018) were recorded, yielding over 20,000 data points for analysis. The data set was split into a 70:30 ratio for training and validation. Three ML models: Naïve Bayes (NB), random forest (RF), and support vector machine (SVM) were studied, and compared with traditional regression models and nomograms (Kattan, CAPSURE, John Hopkins [JHH]) to predict BCR at 1, 3, and 5 years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Over a median follow-up of 70.0 months, 176 (15.6%) developed BCR, at a median time of 16.0 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 11.0-26.0). Multivariate analyses demonstrated strongest association of BCR with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (p: 0.015), positive surgical margins (p < 0.001), extraprostatic extension (p: 0.002), seminal vesicle invasion (p: 0.004), and grade group (p < 0.001). The 3 ML models demonstrated good prediction of BCR at 1, 3, and 5 years, with the area under curves (AUC) of NB at 0.894, 0.876, and 0.894, RF at 0.846, 0.875, and 0.888, and SVM at 0.835, 0.850, and 0.855, respectively. All models demonstrated (1) robust accuracy (>0.82), (2) good calibration with minimal overfitting, (3) longitudinal consistency across the three time points, and (4) inter-model validity. The ML models were comparable to traditional regression analyses (AUC: 0.797, 0.848, and 0.862) and outperformed the three nomograms: Kattan (AUC: 0.815, 0.798, and 0.799), JHH (AUC: 0.820, 0.757, and 0.750) and CAPSURE nomograms (AUC: 0.706, 0.720, and 0.749) (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Supervised ML algorithms can deliver accurate performances and outperform nomograms in predicting BCR after RP. This may facilitate tailored care provisions by identifying high-risk patients who will benefit from multimodal therapy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501684,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Prostate\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"298-305\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Prostate\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.24272\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/12/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Prostate","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.24272","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/12/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

目的:根治性前列腺切除术(RP)后,三分之一的患者会出现生化复发(BCR),这与随后的转移和癌症特异性死亡率有关。我们使用机器学习(ML)算法来预测RP后的BCR,并将其与传统的回归模型和norm图进行比较。方法:利用前瞻性泌尿肿瘤登记处,记录了1130例连续接受RP(2009-2018)患者的18项临床病理参数,产生超过20,000个数据点用于分析。数据集被分成70:30的比例进行训练和验证。研究了三种ML模型:Naïve贝叶斯(NB)、随机森林(RF)和支持向量机(SVM),并与传统的回归模型和模态图(Kattan、CAPSURE、John Hopkins [JHH])进行比较,预测1、3和5年的BCR。结果:在中位随访70.0个月期间,176例(15.6%)发生BCR,中位随访时间为16.0个月(四分位数间距[IQR]: 11.0-26.0)。多变量分析表明,BCR与前列腺特异性抗原(PSA) (p: 0.015)、手术切缘阳性(p: 0.82)、(2)良好的校准和最小的过拟合、(3)三个时间点的纵向一致性以及(4)模型间效度之间的相关性最强。ML模型与传统回归分析(AUC: 0.797、0.848和0.862)相当,优于Kattan (AUC: 0.815、0.798和0.799)、JHH (AUC: 0.820、0.757和0.750)和CAPSURE (AUC: 0.706、0.720和0.749)(p结论:监督ML算法在预测RP后BCR方面可以提供准确的性能,并且优于nomogram。这可以通过识别将从多模式治疗中受益的高危患者来促进量身定制的护理提供。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Incorporating artificial intelligence in urology: Supervised machine learning algorithms demonstrate comparative advantage over nomograms in predicting biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy.

Objective: After radical prostatectomy (RP), one-third of patients will experience biochemical recurrence (BCR), which is associated with subsequent metastasis and cancer-specific mortality. We employed machine learning (ML) algorithms to predict BCR after RP, and compare them with traditional regression models and nomograms.

Methods: Utilizing a prospective Uro-oncology registry, 18 clinicopathological parameters of 1130 consecutive patients who underwent RP (2009-2018) were recorded, yielding over 20,000 data points for analysis. The data set was split into a 70:30 ratio for training and validation. Three ML models: Naïve Bayes (NB), random forest (RF), and support vector machine (SVM) were studied, and compared with traditional regression models and nomograms (Kattan, CAPSURE, John Hopkins [JHH]) to predict BCR at 1, 3, and 5 years.

Results: Over a median follow-up of 70.0 months, 176 (15.6%) developed BCR, at a median time of 16.0 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 11.0-26.0). Multivariate analyses demonstrated strongest association of BCR with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (p: 0.015), positive surgical margins (p < 0.001), extraprostatic extension (p: 0.002), seminal vesicle invasion (p: 0.004), and grade group (p < 0.001). The 3 ML models demonstrated good prediction of BCR at 1, 3, and 5 years, with the area under curves (AUC) of NB at 0.894, 0.876, and 0.894, RF at 0.846, 0.875, and 0.888, and SVM at 0.835, 0.850, and 0.855, respectively. All models demonstrated (1) robust accuracy (>0.82), (2) good calibration with minimal overfitting, (3) longitudinal consistency across the three time points, and (4) inter-model validity. The ML models were comparable to traditional regression analyses (AUC: 0.797, 0.848, and 0.862) and outperformed the three nomograms: Kattan (AUC: 0.815, 0.798, and 0.799), JHH (AUC: 0.820, 0.757, and 0.750) and CAPSURE nomograms (AUC: 0.706, 0.720, and 0.749) (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Supervised ML algorithms can deliver accurate performances and outperform nomograms in predicting BCR after RP. This may facilitate tailored care provisions by identifying high-risk patients who will benefit from multimodal therapy.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信