MOTIVATION: Classification and regression trees have long been used for cancer diagnosis and prognosis. Nevertheless, instability and variable selection bias, as well as overfitting, are well-known problems of tree-based methods. In this article, we investigate whether ensemble tree classifiers can ameliorate these difficulties, using data from two recent studies of radical prostatectomy in prostate cancer. RESULTS: Using time to progression following prostatectomy as the relevant clinical endpoint, we found that ensemble tree classifiers robustly and reproducibly identified three subgroups of patients in the two clinical datasets: non-progressors, early progressors and late progressors. Moreover, the consensus classifications were independent predictors of time to progression compared to known clinical prognostic factors.
MOTIVATION: Classification and regression trees have long been used for cancer diagnosis and prognosis. Nevertheless, instability and variable selection bias, as well as overfitting, are well-known problems of tree-based methods. In this article, we investigate whether ensemble tree classifiers can ameliorate these difficulties, using data from two recent studies of radical prostatectomy in prostate cancer. RESULTS: Using time to progression following prostatectomy as the relevant clinical endpoint, we found that ensemble tree classifiers robustly and reproducibly identified three subgroups of patients in the two clinical datasets: non-progressors, early progressors and late progressors. Moreover, the consensus classifications were independent predictors of time to progression compared to known clinical prognostic factors.
Authors: Yan Ping Yu; Douglas Landsittel; Ling Jing; Joel Nelson; Baoguo Ren; Lijun Liu; Courtney McDonald; Ryan Thomas; Rajiv Dhir; Sydney Finkelstein; George Michalopoulos; Michael Becich; Jian-Hua Luo Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-07-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Robert O Stuart; William Wachsman; Charles C Berry; Jessica Wang-Rodriguez; Linda Wasserman; Igor Klacansky; Dan Masys; Karen Arden; Steven Goodison; Michael McClelland; Yipeng Wang; Anne Sawyers; Iveta Kalcheva; David Tarin; Dan Mercola Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2004-01-13 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: James A Koziol; Jian-Ying Zhang; Carlos A Casiano; Xuan-Xian Peng; Fu-Dong Shi; Anne C Feng; Edward K L Chan; Eng M Tan Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2003-11-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Yipeng Wang; Xiao-Qin Xia; Zhenyu Jia; Anne Sawyers; Huazhen Yao; Jessica Wang-Rodriquez; Dan Mercola; Michael McClelland Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2010-07-27 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Ignat Drozdov; Jan Bornschein; Thomas Wex; Najl V Valeyev; Sophia Tsoka; Peter Malfertheiner Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-04-23 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Omneya Attallah; Alan Karthikesalingam; Peter J E Holt; Matthew M Thompson; Rob Sayers; Matthew J Bown; Eddie C Choke; Xianghong Ma Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2017-08-03 Impact factor: 2.796