Literature DB >> 25317082

Evaluating Random Forests for Survival Analysis using Prediction Error Curves.

Ulla B Mogensen1, Hemant Ishwaran2, Thomas A Gerds1.   

Abstract

Prediction error curves are increasingly used to assess and compare predictions in survival analysis. This article surveys the R package pec which provides a set of functions for efficient computation of prediction error curves. The software implements inverse probability of censoring weights to deal with right censored data and several variants of cross-validation to deal with the apparent error problem. In principle, all kinds of prediction models can be assessed, and the package readily supports most traditional regression modeling strategies, like Cox regression or additive hazard regression, as well as state of the art machine learning methods such as random forests, a nonparametric method which provides promising alternatives to traditional strategies in low and high-dimensional settings. We show how the functionality of pec can be extended to yet unsupported prediction models. As an example, we implement support for random forest prediction models based on the R-packages randomSurvivalForest and party. Using data of the Copenhagen Stroke Study we use pec to compare random forests to a Cox regression model derived from stepwise variable selection. Reproducible results on the user level are given for publicly available data from the German breast cancer study group.

Entities:  

Keywords:  R.; Survival prediction; prediction error curves; random survival forest

Year:  2012        PMID: 25317082      PMCID: PMC4194196          DOI: 10.18637/jss.v050.i11

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Stat Softw        ISSN: 1548-7660            Impact factor:   6.440


  17 in total

1.  Bagging survival trees.

Authors:  Torsten Hothorn; Berthold Lausen; Axel Benner; Martin Radespiel-Tröger
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2004-01-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Estimating misclassification error with small samples via bootstrap cross-validation.

Authors:  Wenjiang J Fu; Raymond J Carroll; Suojin Wang
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2005-02-02       Impact factor: 6.937

3.  Prediction error estimation: a comparison of resampling methods.

Authors:  Annette M Molinaro; Richard Simon; Ruth M Pfeiffer
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2005-05-19       Impact factor: 6.937

4.  A comparison of bootstrap methods and an adjusted bootstrap approach for estimating the prediction error in microarray classification.

Authors:  Wenyu Jiang; Richard Simon
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2007-12-20       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Efron-type measures of prediction error for survival analysis.

Authors:  Thomas A Gerds; Martin Schumacher
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2007-07-25       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Testing the prediction error difference between 2 predictors.

Authors:  Mark A van de Wiel; Johannes Berkhof; Wessel N van Wieringen
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2009-04-20       Impact factor: 5.899

7.  Adapting prediction error estimates for biased complexity selection in high-dimensional bootstrap samples.

Authors:  Harald Binder; Martin Schumacher
Journal:  Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol       Date:  2008-03-14

Review 8.  Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors.

Authors:  F E Harrell; K L Lee; D B Mark
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1996-02-28       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Automated variable selection methods for logistic regression produced unstable models for predicting acute myocardial infarction mortality.

Authors:  Peter C Austin; Jack V Tu
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 6.437

10.  Silent infarction in acute stroke patients. Prevalence, localization, risk factors, and clinical significance: the Copenhagen Stroke Study.

Authors:  H S Jørgensen; H Nakayama; H O Raaschou; J Gam; T S Olsen
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 7.914

View more
  107 in total

1.  BAYESIAN VARIABLE SELECTION FOR SURVIVAL DATA USING INVERSE MOMENT PRIORS.

Authors:  Amir Nikooienejad; Wenyi Wang; Valen E Johnson
Journal:  Ann Appl Stat       Date:  2020-06-29       Impact factor: 2.083

2.  Post Genome-Wide Gene-Environment Interaction Study Using Random Survival Forest: Insulin Resistance, Lifestyle Factors, and Colorectal Cancer Risk.

Authors:  Su Yon Jung; Jeanette C Papp; Eric M Sobel; Zuo-Feng Zhang
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2019-09-25

3.  In interaction with gender a common CYP3A4 polymorphism may influence the survival rate of chemotherapy for childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

Authors:  A Gézsi; O Lautner-Csorba; D J Erdélyi; G Hullám; P Antal; Á F Semsei; N Kutszegi; M Hegyi; K Csordás; G Kovács; C Szalai
Journal:  Pharmacogenomics J       Date:  2014-09-30       Impact factor: 3.550

4.  The revised American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system (7th edition) improves prognostic stratification after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophagogastric adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Haris Zahoor; James D Luketich; Benny Weksler; Daniel G Winger; Neil A Christie; Ryan M Levy; Michael K Gibson; Jon M Davison; Katie S Nason
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2015-06-26       Impact factor: 2.565

5.  Age and Tumor Volume Predict Growth of Carotid and Vagal Body Paragangliomas.

Authors:  Berdine L Heesterman; Lisa M H de Pont; Berit M Verbist; Andel G L van der Mey; Eleonora P M Corssmit; Frederik J Hes; Peter Paul G van Benthem; Jeroen C Jansen
Journal:  J Neurol Surg B Skull Base       Date:  2017-07-31

6.  Cost Effectiveness of Nusinersen in the Treatment of Patients with Infantile-Onset and Later-Onset Spinal Muscular Atrophy in Sweden.

Authors:  Santiago Zuluaga-Sanchez; Megan Teynor; Christopher Knight; Robin Thompson; Thomas Lundqvist; Mats Ekelund; Annabelle Forsmark; Adrian D Vickers; Andrew Lloyd
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  L₁ splitting rules in survival forests.

Authors:  Hoora Moradian; Denis Larocque; François Bellavance
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  2016-07-05       Impact factor: 1.588

8.  Superiority of temozolomide over radiotherapy for elderly patients with RTK II methylation class, MGMT promoter methylated malignant astrocytoma.

Authors:  Antje Wick; Tobias Kessler; Michael Platten; Christoph Meisner; Michael Bamberg; Ulrich Herrlinger; Jörg Felsberg; Astrid Weyerbrock; Kirsten Papsdorf; Joachim P Steinbach; Michael Sabel; Jan Vesper; Jürgen Debus; Jürgen Meixensberger; Ralf Ketter; Caroline Hertler; Regine Mayer-Steinacker; Sarah Weisang; Hanna Bölting; David Reuss; Guido Reifenberger; Felix Sahm; Andreas von Deimling; Michael Weller; Wolfgang Wick
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2020-08-17       Impact factor: 12.300

9.  The effects of genetic variants related to insulin metabolism pathways and the interactions with lifestyles on colorectal cancer risk.

Authors:  Su Yon Jung; Zuo-Feng Zhang
Journal:  Menopause       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 2.953

10.  Prediction of cardiac death after adenosine myocardial perfusion SPECT based on machine learning.

Authors:  David Haro Alonso; Miles N Wernick; Yongyi Yang; Guido Germano; Daniel S Berman; Piotr Slomka
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2018-03-14       Impact factor: 5.952

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.