Literature DB >> 27722873

Bayesian pretest probability estimation for primary malignant bone tumors based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program (SEER) database.

Matthias Benndorf1, Jakob Neubauer2, Mathias Langer2, Elmar Kotter2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: In the diagnostic process of primary bone tumors, patient age, tumor localization and to a lesser extent sex affect the differential diagnosis. We therefore aim to develop a pretest probability calculator for primary malignant bone tumors based on population data taking these variables into account.
METHODS: We access the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program of the National Cancer Institute, 2015 release) database and analyze data of all primary malignant bone tumors diagnosed between 1973 and 2012. We record age at diagnosis, tumor localization according to the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-O-3) and sex. We take relative probability of the single tumor entity as a surrogate parameter for unadjusted pretest probability. We build a probabilistic (naïve Bayes) classifier to calculate pretest probabilities adjusted for age, tumor localization and sex.
RESULTS: We analyze data from 12,931 patients (647 chondroblastic osteosarcomas, 3659 chondrosarcomas, 1080 chordomas, 185 dedifferentiated chondrosarcomas, 2006 Ewing's sarcomas, 281 fibroblastic osteosarcomas, 129 fibrosarcomas, 291 fibrous malignant histiocytomas, 289 malignant giant cell tumors, 238 myxoid chondrosarcomas, 3730 osteosarcomas, 252 parosteal osteosarcomas, 144 telangiectatic osteosarcomas). We make our probability calculator accessible at http://ebm-radiology.com/bayesbone/index.html . We provide exhaustive tables for age and localization data. Results from tenfold cross-validation show that in 79.8 % of cases the pretest probability is correctly raised.
CONCLUSIONS: Our approach employs population data to calculate relative pretest probabilities for primary malignant bone tumors. The calculator is not diagnostic in nature. However, resulting probabilities might serve as an initial evaluation of probabilities of tumors on the differential diagnosis list.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayes classifier; Bayesian; Bone tumor; Epidemiology

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27722873     DOI: 10.1007/s11548-016-1491-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg        ISSN: 1861-6410            Impact factor:   2.924


  9 in total

1.  Bone Browser a decision-aid for the radiological diagnosis of bone tumors.

Authors:  I Lejbkowicz; Fred Wiener; A Nachtigal; D Militiannu; U Kleinhaus; Y H Applbaum
Journal:  Comput Methods Programs Biomed       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 5.428

2.  A bayesian network for differentiating benign from malignant thyroid nodules using sonographic and demographic features.

Authors:  Yueyi I Liu; Aya Kamaya; Terry S Desser; Daniel L Rubin
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  A Bayesian network for diagnosis of primary bone tumors.

Authors:  C E Kahn; J J Laur; G F Carrera
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 4.056

Review 4.  Systematic errors in medical decision making: judgment limitations.

Authors:  N V Dawson; H R Arkes
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1987 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  A probabilistic approach to the diagnosis of bone tumors.

Authors:  G S Lodwick
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  1965-12       Impact factor: 2.303

6.  Interpretation by physicians of clinical laboratory results.

Authors:  W Casscells; A Schoenberger; T B Graboys
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1978-11-02       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  [Fibrous metaphyseal defect (fibrous cortical defect, non-ossifying fibroma). Paper II: differential diagnosis (author's transl)].

Authors:  J Freyschmidt; H Ostertag; D Saure
Journal:  Rofo       Date:  1981-04

8.  Incidental enchondromas of the knee.

Authors:  Michael J Walden; Mark D Murphey; Jorge A Vidal
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 9.  Bone tumors and tumorlike conditions: analysis with conventional radiography.

Authors:  Theodore T Miller
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-01-25       Impact factor: 11.105

  9 in total
  5 in total

1.  Using Machine Learning to Unravel the Value of Radiographic Features for the Classification of Bone Tumors.

Authors:  Derun Pan; Renyi Liu; Bowen Zheng; Jianxiang Yuan; Hui Zeng; Zilong He; Zhendong Luo; Genggeng Qin; Weiguo Chen
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2021-03-11       Impact factor: 3.411

2.  Symphysis Pubis Osteomyelitis: An Uncommon Complication after Robotic Assisted Radical Prostatectomy-Case Description with Literature Review.

Authors:  Jad A Degheili; Mazen M Mansour; Rami W Nasr
Journal:  Case Rep Urol       Date:  2018-02-13

3.  Cognitive map to support the diagnosis of solitary bone tumors in pediatric patients.

Authors:  Felipe Costa Moreira; André Yui Aihara; Henrique Manoel Lederman; Ivan Torres Pisa; Josceli Maria Tenório
Journal:  Radiol Bras       Date:  2018 Sep-Oct

4.  Predictors of occult lymph node metastasis in cutaneous head and neck melanoma.

Authors:  Jonathan S Ni; Tyler A Janz; Shaun A Nguyen; Eric J Lentsch
Journal:  World J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2019-09-28

Review 5.  The Lodwick classification for grading growth rate of lytic bone tumors: a decision tree approach.

Authors:  Matthias Benndorf; Fabian Bamberg; Pia M Jungmann
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2021-07-24       Impact factor: 2.199

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.