多种肿瘤标志物联合诊断恶性胸腔积液:五种机器学习模型的比较研究。

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q3 BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
Yixi Zhang, Jingyuan Wang, Baosheng Liang, Hanyu Wu, Yangyu Chen
{"title":"多种肿瘤标志物联合诊断恶性胸腔积液:五种机器学习模型的比较研究。","authors":"Yixi Zhang,&nbsp;Jingyuan Wang,&nbsp;Baosheng Liang,&nbsp;Hanyu Wu,&nbsp;Yangyu Chen","doi":"10.1177/03936155231158125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To evaluate the diagnostic value of combinations of tumor markers carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen (CA) 125, CA153, and CA19-9 in identifying malignant pleural effusion (MPE) from non-malignant pleural effusion (non-MPE) using machine learning, and compare the performance of popular machine learning methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 319 samples were collected from patients with pleural effusion in Beijing and Wuhan, China, from January 2018 to June 2020. Five machine learning methods including Logistic regression, extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), Bayesian additive regression tree, random forest, and support vector machine were applied to evaluate the diagnostic performance. Sensitivity, specificity, Youden's index, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the performance of different diagnostic models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For diagnostic models with a single tumor marker, the model using CEA, constructed by XGBoost, performed best (AUC = 0.895, sensitivity = 0.80), and the model with CA153, also by XGBoost, showed the largest specificity 0.98. Among all combinations of tumor markers, the combination of CEA and CA153 achieved the best performance (AUC = 0.921, sensitivity = 0.85) in identifying MPE under the diagnostic model constructed by XGBoost.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Diagnostic models for MPE with a combination of multiple tumor markers outperformed the models with a single tumor marker, particularly in sensitivity. Using machine learning methods, especially XGBoost, could comprehensively improve the diagnostic accuracy of MPE.</p>","PeriodicalId":50334,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Biological Markers","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnosis of malignant pleural effusion with combinations of multiple tumor markers: A comparison study of five machine learning models.\",\"authors\":\"Yixi Zhang,&nbsp;Jingyuan Wang,&nbsp;Baosheng Liang,&nbsp;Hanyu Wu,&nbsp;Yangyu Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/03936155231158125\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To evaluate the diagnostic value of combinations of tumor markers carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen (CA) 125, CA153, and CA19-9 in identifying malignant pleural effusion (MPE) from non-malignant pleural effusion (non-MPE) using machine learning, and compare the performance of popular machine learning methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 319 samples were collected from patients with pleural effusion in Beijing and Wuhan, China, from January 2018 to June 2020. Five machine learning methods including Logistic regression, extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), Bayesian additive regression tree, random forest, and support vector machine were applied to evaluate the diagnostic performance. Sensitivity, specificity, Youden's index, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the performance of different diagnostic models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For diagnostic models with a single tumor marker, the model using CEA, constructed by XGBoost, performed best (AUC = 0.895, sensitivity = 0.80), and the model with CA153, also by XGBoost, showed the largest specificity 0.98. Among all combinations of tumor markers, the combination of CEA and CA153 achieved the best performance (AUC = 0.921, sensitivity = 0.85) in identifying MPE under the diagnostic model constructed by XGBoost.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Diagnostic models for MPE with a combination of multiple tumor markers outperformed the models with a single tumor marker, particularly in sensitivity. Using machine learning methods, especially XGBoost, could comprehensively improve the diagnostic accuracy of MPE.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50334,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Biological Markers\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Biological Markers\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/03936155231158125\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Biological Markers","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03936155231158125","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

背景:评价肿瘤标志物癌胚抗原(CEA)、碳水化合物抗原(CA) 125、CA153和CA19-9联合应用机器学习识别恶性胸腔积液(MPE)和非恶性胸腔积液(非MPE)的诊断价值,并比较常用机器学习方法的性能。方法:2018年1月至2020年6月,在中国北京和武汉收集胸膜积液患者样本319例。采用Logistic回归、极限梯度增强(XGBoost)、贝叶斯加性回归树、随机森林和支持向量机等5种机器学习方法对诊断性能进行评价。采用敏感性、特异性、约登指数和受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)评价不同诊断模型的性能。结果:对于单一肿瘤标志物的诊断模型,使用XGBoost构建的CEA模型效果最好(AUC = 0.895,灵敏度= 0.80),使用XGBoost构建的CA153模型的特异性最大,为0.98。在所有肿瘤标志物组合中,CEA与CA153组合在XGBoost构建的诊断模型下识别MPE的效果最佳(AUC = 0.921,灵敏度= 0.85)。结论:结合多种肿瘤标志物的MPE诊断模型优于单一肿瘤标志物的诊断模型,特别是在敏感性方面。利用机器学习方法,尤其是XGBoost,可以全面提高MPE的诊断准确率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Diagnosis of malignant pleural effusion with combinations of multiple tumor markers: A comparison study of five machine learning models.

Background: To evaluate the diagnostic value of combinations of tumor markers carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen (CA) 125, CA153, and CA19-9 in identifying malignant pleural effusion (MPE) from non-malignant pleural effusion (non-MPE) using machine learning, and compare the performance of popular machine learning methods.

Methods: A total of 319 samples were collected from patients with pleural effusion in Beijing and Wuhan, China, from January 2018 to June 2020. Five machine learning methods including Logistic regression, extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), Bayesian additive regression tree, random forest, and support vector machine were applied to evaluate the diagnostic performance. Sensitivity, specificity, Youden's index, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the performance of different diagnostic models.

Results: For diagnostic models with a single tumor marker, the model using CEA, constructed by XGBoost, performed best (AUC = 0.895, sensitivity = 0.80), and the model with CA153, also by XGBoost, showed the largest specificity 0.98. Among all combinations of tumor markers, the combination of CEA and CA153 achieved the best performance (AUC = 0.921, sensitivity = 0.85) in identifying MPE under the diagnostic model constructed by XGBoost.

Conclusions: Diagnostic models for MPE with a combination of multiple tumor markers outperformed the models with a single tumor marker, particularly in sensitivity. Using machine learning methods, especially XGBoost, could comprehensively improve the diagnostic accuracy of MPE.

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
International Journal of Biological Markers
International Journal of Biological Markers 医学-生物工程与应用微生物
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: IJBM is an international, online only, peer-reviewed Journal, which publishes original research and critical reviews primarily focused on cancer biomarkers. IJBM targets advanced topics regarding the application of biomarkers in oncology and is dedicated to solid tumors in adult subjects. The clinical scenarios of interests are screening and early diagnosis of cancer, prognostic assessment, prediction of the response to and monitoring of treatment.
×
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