PURPOSE: Shapley additive explanation (SHAP) values represent a unified approach to interpreting predictions made by complex machine learning (ML) models, with superior consistency and accuracy compared with prior methods. We describe a novel application of SHAP values to the prediction of mortality risk in prostate cancer. METHODS: Patients with nonmetastatic, node-negative prostate cancer, diagnosed between 2004 and 2015, were identified using the National Cancer Database. Model features were specified a priori: age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), Gleason score, percent positive cores (PPC), comorbidity score, and clinical T stage. We trained a gradient-boosted tree model and applied SHAP values to model predictions. Open-source libraries in Python 3.7 were used for all analyses. RESULTS: We identified 372,808 patients meeting the inclusion criteria. When analyzing the interaction between PSA and Gleason score, we demonstrated consistency with the literature using the example of low-PSA, high-Gleason prostate cancer, recently identified as a unique entity with a poor prognosis. When analyzing the PPC-Gleason score interaction, we identified a novel finding of stronger interaction effects in patients with Gleason ≥ 8 disease compared with Gleason 6-7 disease, particularly with PPC ≥ 50%. Subsequent confirmatory linear analyses supported this finding: 5-year overall survival in Gleason ≥ 8 patients was 87.7% with PPC < 50% versus 77.2% with PPC ≥ 50% (P < .001), compared with 89.1% versus 86.0% in Gleason 7 patients (P < .001), with a significant interaction term between PPC ≥ 50% and Gleason ≥ 8 (P < .001). CONCLUSION: We describe a novel application of SHAP values for modeling and visualizing nonlinear interaction effects in prostate cancer. This ML-based approach is a promising technique with the potential to meaningfully improve risk stratification and staging systems.
PURPOSE: Shapley additive explanation (SHAP) values represent a unified approach to interpreting predictions made by complex machine learning (ML) models, with superior consistency and accuracy compared with prior methods. We describe a novel application of SHAP values to the prediction of mortality risk in prostate cancer. METHODS:Patients with nonmetastatic, node-negative prostate cancer, diagnosed between 2004 and 2015, were identified using the National Cancer Database. Model features were specified a priori: age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), Gleason score, percent positive cores (PPC), comorbidity score, and clinical T stage. We trained a gradient-boosted tree model and applied SHAP values to model predictions. Open-source libraries in Python 3.7 were used for all analyses. RESULTS: We identified 372,808 patients meeting the inclusion criteria. When analyzing the interaction between PSA and Gleason score, we demonstrated consistency with the literature using the example of low-PSA, high-Gleasonprostate cancer, recently identified as a unique entity with a poor prognosis. When analyzing the PPC-Gleason score interaction, we identified a novel finding of stronger interaction effects in patients with Gleason ≥ 8 disease compared with Gleason 6-7 disease, particularly with PPC ≥ 50%. Subsequent confirmatory linear analyses supported this finding: 5-year overall survival in Gleason ≥ 8 patients was 87.7% with PPC < 50% versus 77.2% with PPC ≥ 50% (P < .001), compared with 89.1% versus 86.0% in Gleason 7 patients (P < .001), with a significant interaction term between PPC ≥ 50% and Gleason ≥ 8 (P < .001). CONCLUSION: We describe a novel application of SHAP values for modeling and visualizing nonlinear interaction effects in prostate cancer. This ML-based approach is a promising technique with the potential to meaningfully improve risk stratification and staging systems.
Authors: Hugo Saner; Tobias Nef; Narayan Schütz; Samuel E J Knobel; Angela Botros; Michael Single; Bruno Pais; Valérie Santschi; Daniel Gatica-Perez; Philipp Buluschek; Prabitha Urwyler; Stephan M Gerber; René M Müri; Urs P Mosimann Journal: NPJ Digit Med Date: 2022-08-16
Authors: Richard John Woodman; Kimberley Bryant; Michael J Sorich; Alberto Pilotto; Arduino Aleksander Mangoni Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2021-06-21 Impact factor: 5.428