Literature DB >> 10565735

Genetically engineered neural networks for predicting prostate cancer progression after radical prostatectomy.

S R Potter1, M C Miller, L A Mangold, K A Jones, J I Epstein, R W Veltri, A W Partin.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To use pathologic, morphometric, DNA ploidy, and clinical data to develop and test a genetically engineered neural network (GENN) for the prediction of biochemical (prostate-specific antigen [PSA]) progression after radical prostatectomy in a select group of men with clinically localized prostate cancer.
METHODS: Two hundred fourteen men who underwent anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer were selected on the basis of adequate follow-up, pathologic criteria indicating an intermediate risk of progression, and availability of archival tissue. The median age was 58.9 years (range 40 to 87). Men with Gleason score 5 to 7 and clinical Stage T1b-T2c tumors were included. Follow-up was a median of 9.5 years. Three GENNs were developed using pathologic findings (Gleason score, extraprostatic extension, surgical margin status), age, quantitative nuclear grade (QNG), and DNA ploidy. These networks were developed using three randomly selected training (n = 136) and testing (n = 35) sets. Different variable subsets were compared for the ability to maximize prediction of progression. Both standard logistic regression and Cox regression analyses were used concurrently to calculate progression risk.
RESULTS: Biochemical (PSA) progression occurred in 84 men (40%), with a median time to progression of 48 months (range 1 to 168). GENN models were trained using inputs consisting of (a) pathologic features and patient age; (b) QNG and DNA ploidy; and (c) all variables combined. These GENN models achieved an average accuracy of 74.4%, 63.1 %, and 73.5%, respectively, for the prediction of progression in the training sets. In the testing sets, the three GENN models had an accuracy of 74.3%, 80.0%, and 78.1%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The GENN models developed show promise in predicting progression in select groups of men after radical prostatectomy. Neural networks using QNG and DNA ploidy as input variables performed as well as networks using Gleason score and staging information. All GENN models were superior to logistic regression modeling and to Cox regression analysis in prediction of PSA progression. The development of models using improved input variables and imaging systems in larger, well-characterized patient groups with long-term follow-up is ongoing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10565735     DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(99)00328-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  12 in total

Review 1.  Artificial neural networks for predictive modeling in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Eduard J Gamito; E David Crawford
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 2.  Nuclear morphometry, nucleomics and prostate cancer progression.

Authors:  Robert W Veltri; Christhunesa S Christudass; Sumit Isharwal
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2012-04-16       Impact factor: 3.285

3.  Combining neural network and genetic algorithm for prediction of lung sounds.

Authors:  Inan Güler; Hüseyin Polat; Uçman Ergün
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 4.460

4.  Artificial neural networks for decision-making in urologic oncology.

Authors:  Theodore Anagnostou; Mesut Remzi; Bob Djavan
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2003

5.  Prediction of biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy in men with prostate cancer by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: initial results.

Authors:  Sung Yoon Park; Chan Kyo Kim; Byung Kwan Park; Hyun Moo Lee; Kyung Soo Lee
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-11-03       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 6.  Artificial neural networks and prostate cancer--tools for diagnosis and management.

Authors:  Xinhai Hu; Henning Cammann; Hellmuth-A Meyer; Kurt Miller; Klaus Jung; Carsten Stephan
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2013-02-12       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 7.  Critical review of prostate cancer predictive tools.

Authors:  Shahrokh F Shariat; Michael W Kattan; Andrew J Vickers; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  Future Oncol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.404

8.  Using nuclear morphometry to predict the need for treatment among men with low grade, low stage prostate cancer enrolled in a program of expectant management with curative intent.

Authors:  Danil V Makarov; Cameron Marlow; Jonathan I Epstein; M Craig Miller; Patricia Landis; Alan W Partin; H Ballentine Carter; Robert W Veltri
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2008-02-01       Impact factor: 4.104

9.  Applications of machine learning in cancer prediction and prognosis.

Authors:  Joseph A Cruz; David S Wishart
Journal:  Cancer Inform       Date:  2007-02-11

10.  A systematic review of the applications of Expert Systems (ES) and machine learning (ML) in clinical urology.

Authors:  Hesham Salem; Daniele Soria; Jonathan N Lund; Amir Awwad
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2021-07-22       Impact factor: 2.796

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.