Literature DB >> 29048993

Personalized Risk Prediction in Clinical Oncology Research: Applications and Practical Issues Using Survival Trees and Random Forests.

Chen Hu1, Jon Arni Steingrimsson2.   

Abstract

A crucial component of making individualized treatment decisions is to accurately predict each patient's disease risk. In clinical oncology, disease risks are often measured through time-to-event data, such as overall survival and progression/recurrence-free survival, and are often subject to censoring. Risk prediction models based on recursive partitioning methods are becoming increasingly popular largely due to their ability to handle nonlinear relationships, higher-order interactions, and/or high-dimensional covariates. The most popular recursive partitioning methods are versions of the Classification and Regression Tree (CART) algorithm, which builds a simple interpretable tree structured model. With the aim of increasing prediction accuracy, the random forest algorithm averages multiple CART trees, creating a flexible risk prediction model. Risk prediction models used in clinical oncology commonly use both traditional demographic and tumor pathological factors as well as high-dimensional genetic markers and treatment parameters from multimodality treatments. In this article, we describe the most commonly used extensions of the CART and random forest algorithms to right-censored outcomes. We focus on how they differ from the methods for noncensored outcomes, and how the different splitting rules and methods for cost-complexity pruning impact these algorithms. We demonstrate these algorithms by analyzing a randomized Phase III clinical trial of breast cancer. We also conduct Monte Carlo simulations to compare the prediction accuracy of survival forests with more commonly used regression models under various scenarios. These simulation studies aim to evaluate how sensitive the prediction accuracy is to the underlying model specifications, the choice of tuning parameters, and the degrees of missing covariates.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CART; Cancer; risk prediction; survival analysis; survival forests; survival trees

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29048993      PMCID: PMC7196339          DOI: 10.1080/10543406.2017.1377730

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biopharm Stat        ISSN: 1054-3406            Impact factor:   1.051


  10 in total

1.  Functional survival forests for multivariate longitudinal outcomes: Dynamic prediction of Alzheimer's disease progression.

Authors:  Jeffrey Lin; Kan Li; Sheng Luo
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2020-07-29       Impact factor: 3.021

2.  Machine learning for optimized individual survival prediction in resectable upper gastrointestinal cancer.

Authors:  Jin-On Jung; Nerma Crnovrsanin; Naita Maren Wirsik; Henrik Nienhüser; Leila Peters; Felix Popp; André Schulze; Martin Wagner; Beat Peter Müller-Stich; Markus Wolfgang Büchler; Thomas Schmidt
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2022-05-26       Impact factor: 4.553

3.  Supervised Pretraining through Contrastive Categorical Positive Samplings to Improve COVID-19 Mortality Prediction.

Authors:  Tingyi Wanyan; Mingquan Lin; Eyal Klang; Kartikeya M Menon; Faris F Gulamali; Ariful Azad; Yiye Zhang; Ying Ding; Zhangyang Wang; Fei Wang; Benjamin Glicksberg; Yifan Peng
Journal:  ACM BCB       Date:  2022-08-07

Review 4.  A scoping methodological review of simulation studies comparing statistical and machine learning approaches to risk prediction for time-to-event data.

Authors:  Hayley Smith; Michael Sweeting; Tim Morris; Michael J Crowther
Journal:  Diagn Progn Res       Date:  2022-06-02

5.  Can Classification and Regression Tree Analysis Help Identify Clinically Meaningful Risk Groups for Hip Fracture Prediction in Older American Men (The MrOS Cohort Study)?

Authors:  Yi Su; Timothy C Y Kwok; Steven R Cummings; Benjamin H K Yip; Peggy M Cawthon
Journal:  JBMR Plus       Date:  2019-08-21

6.  Comparison of machine learning tools for the prediction of AMD based on genetic, age, and diabetes-related variables in the Chinese population.

Authors:  Shaofeng Hao; Junye Bai; Huimin Liu; Lijun Wang; Tao Liu; Chaobin Lin; Xiangguang Luo; Junhui Gao; Jiangman Zhao; Huilin Li; Hui Tang
Journal:  Regen Ther       Date:  2020-09-29       Impact factor: 3.419

7.  The Application and Comparison of Machine Learning Models for the Prediction of Breast Cancer Prognosis: Retrospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Jialong Xiao; Miao Mo; Zezhou Wang; Changming Zhou; Jie Shen; Jing Yuan; Yulian He; Ying Zheng
Journal:  JMIR Med Inform       Date:  2022-02-18

8.  Nomograms for Predicting Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence and Overall Postoperative Patient Survival.

Authors:  Lidi Ma; Kan Deng; Cheng Zhang; Haixia Li; Yingwei Luo; Yingsi Yang; Congrui Li; Xinming Li; Zhijun Geng; Chuanmiao Xie
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 6.244

9.  Random Survival Forests to Predict Disease Control for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated With Transarterial Chemoembolization Combined With Sorafenib.

Authors:  Bin-Yan Zhong; Zhi-Ping Yan; Jun-Hui Sun; Lei Zhang; Zhong-Heng Hou; Xiao-Li Zhu; Ling Wen; Cai-Fang Ni
Journal:  Front Mol Biosci       Date:  2021-05-20

10.  Machine learning models predict coagulopathy in spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage patients in ER.

Authors:  Fengping Zhu; Zhiguang Pan; Ying Tang; Pengfei Fu; Sijie Cheng; Wenzhong Hou; Qi Zhang; Hong Huang; Yirui Sun
Journal:  CNS Neurosci Ther       Date:  2020-11-28       Impact factor: 7.035

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.