Mario A Cypko1, Matthaeus Stoehr2, Marcin Kozniewski3,4, Marek J Druzdzel3,4, Andreas Dietz2, Leonard Berliner5, Heinz U Lemke6. 1. Innovation Center Computer Assisted Surgery, University of Leipzig, Semmelweisstr. 14, 04103, Leipzig, Germany. mario.cypko@medizin.uni-leipzig.de. 2. Clinic of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Head Medicine and Oral Health, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany. 3. School of Information Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 4. Faculty of Computer Science Bialystok University of Technology, Bialystok, Poland. 5. New York Methodist Hospital, Brooklyn, NY, USA. 6. Innovation Center Computer Assisted Surgery, University of Leipzig, Semmelweisstr. 14, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Oncological treatment is being increasingly complex, and therefore, decision making in multidisciplinary teams is becoming the key activity in the clinical pathways. The increased complexity is related to the number and variability of possible treatment decisions that may be relevant to a patient. In this paper, we describe validation of a multidisciplinary cancer treatment decision in the clinical domain of head and neck oncology. METHOD: Probabilistic graphical models and corresponding inference algorithms, in the form of Bayesian networks, can support complex decision-making processes by providing a mathematically reproducible and transparent advice. The quality of BN-based advice depends on the quality of the model. Therefore, it is vital to validate the model before it is applied in practice. RESULTS: For an example BN subnetwork of laryngeal cancer with 303 variables, we evaluated 66 patient records. To validate the model on this dataset, a validation workflow was applied in combination with quantitative and qualitative analyses. In the subsequent analyses, we observed four sources of imprecise predictions: incorrect data, incomplete patient data, outvoting relevant observations, and incorrect model. Finally, the four problems were solved by modifying the data and the model. CONCLUSION: The presented validation effort is related to the model complexity. For simpler models, the validation workflow is the same, although it may require fewer validation methods. The validation success is related to the model's well-founded knowledge base. The remaining laryngeal cancer model may disclose additional sources of imprecise predictions.
PURPOSE: Oncological treatment is being increasingly complex, and therefore, decision making in multidisciplinary teams is becoming the key activity in the clinical pathways. The increased complexity is related to the number and variability of possible treatment decisions that may be relevant to a patient. In this paper, we describe validation of a multidisciplinary cancer treatment decision in the clinical domain of head and neck oncology. METHOD: Probabilistic graphical models and corresponding inference algorithms, in the form of Bayesian networks, can support complex decision-making processes by providing a mathematically reproducible and transparent advice. The quality of BN-based advice depends on the quality of the model. Therefore, it is vital to validate the model before it is applied in practice. RESULTS: For an example BN subnetwork of laryngeal cancer with 303 variables, we evaluated 66 patient records. To validate the model on this dataset, a validation workflow was applied in combination with quantitative and qualitative analyses. In the subsequent analyses, we observed four sources of imprecise predictions: incorrect data, incomplete patient data, outvoting relevant observations, and incorrect model. Finally, the four problems were solved by modifying the data and the model. CONCLUSION: The presented validation effort is related to the model complexity. For simpler models, the validation workflow is the same, although it may require fewer validation methods. The validation success is related to the model's well-founded knowledge base. The remaining laryngeal cancer model may disclose additional sources of imprecise predictions.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bayesian network; Head and neck oncology; Laryngeal cancer; Model validation; Multidisciplinary tumor board; Therapy decision support system
Authors: Liliane Chatenoud; Werner Garavello; Eleonora Pagan; Paola Bertuccio; Silvano Gallus; Carlo La Vecchia; Eva Negri; Cristina Bosetti Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2015-09-14 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Christian Ritter; Thomas Wollmann; Patrick Bernhard; Manuel Gunkel; Delia M Braun; Ji-Young Lee; Jan Meiners; Ronald Simon; Guido Sauter; Holger Erfle; Karsten Rippe; Ralf Bartenschlager; Karl Rohr Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2019-06-08 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Marius Huehn; Jan Gaebel; Alexander Oeser; Andreas Dietz; Thomas Neumuth; Gunnar Wichmann; Matthaeus Stoehr Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-11-23 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Jan Gaebel; Stefanie Mehlhorn; Alexander Oeser; Andreas Dietz; Thomas Neumuth; Matthaeus Stoehr Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2022-06-03 Impact factor: 3.421