Literature DB >> 33889012

Comparison of Prediction Models for Acute Kidney Injury Among Patients with Hepatobiliary Malignancies Based on XGBoost and LASSO-Logistic Algorithms.

Yunlu Zhang1,2,3, Yimei Wang1,2,3, Jiarui Xu1,2,3, Bowen Zhu1,2,3, Xiaohong Chen1,2,3, Xiaoqiang Ding1,2,3, Yang Li1,2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Based on the admission data, we applied the XGBoost algorithm to create a prediction model to estimate the AKI risk in patients with hepatobiliary malignancies and then compare its prediction capacity with the logistic model.
METHODS: We reviewed clinical data of 7968 and 589 liver/gallbladder cancer patients admitted to Zhongshan Hospital during 2014 and 2015. They were randomly divided into the training set and test set. Data were collected from the electronic medical record system. XGBoost and LASSO-logistic were used to develop prediction models, respectively. The performance measures included the classification matrix, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), lift chart and learning curve.
RESULTS: Of 6846 participants in the training set, 792 (11.6%) cases developed AKI. In XGBoost model, the top 3 most important variables for AKI were serum creatinine (SCr), glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and antitumor treatment in liver cancer patients. Similarly, SCr and eGFR also ranked second and third most important variables in the gallbladder cancer-related AKI model just after phosphorus. In the classification matrix, XGBoost model possessed a comparably better agreement between the actual observations and the predictions than LASSO-logistic model. The Youden's index of XGBoost model was 47.5% and 59.3%, respectively, which was significantly higher than that of LASSO-logistic model (41.6% and 32.7%). The AUCs of XGBoost model were 0.822 in liver cancer and 0.850 in gallbladder cancer. By comparison, the AUC values of Logistic models were significantly lower as 0.793 and 0.740 (p=0.024 and 0.018). With the accumulation of training samples, XGBoost model maintained greater robustness in the learning curve.
CONCLUSION: XGBoost model based on admission data has higher accuracy and stronger robustness in predicting AKI. It will benefit AKI risk classification management in clinical practice and take an advanced intervention among patients with hepatobiliary malignancies.
© 2021 Zhang et al.

Entities:  

Keywords:  LASSO-logistic regression; acute kidney injury; disease prediction; extreme gradient boosting; hepatobiliary malignancy; machine learning

Year:  2021        PMID: 33889012      PMCID: PMC8057825          DOI: 10.2147/IJGM.S302795

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gen Med        ISSN: 1178-7074


  41 in total

1.  Acute kidney injury following hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: incidence, risk factors and prognostic value.

Authors:  Chetana Lim; Etienne Audureau; Chady Salloum; Eric Levesque; Eylon Lahat; Jean Claude Merle; Philippe Compagnon; Gilles Dhonneur; Cyrille Feray; Daniel Azoulay
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2016-05-07       Impact factor: 3.647

2.  Acute kidney injury in China: a cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Li Yang; Guolan Xing; Li Wang; Yonggui Wu; Suhua Li; Gang Xu; Qiang He; Jianghua Chen; Menghua Chen; Xiaohua Liu; Zaizhi Zhu; Lin Yang; Xiyan Lian; Feng Ding; Yun Li; Huamin Wang; Jianqin Wang; Rong Wang; Changlin Mei; Jixian Xu; Rongshan Li; Juan Cao; Liang Zhang; Yan Wang; Jinhua Xu; Beiyan Bao; Bicheng Liu; Hongyu Chen; Shaomei Li; Yan Zha; Qiong Luo; Dongcheng Chen; Yulan Shen; Yunhua Liao; Zhengrong Zhang; Xianqiu Wang; Kun Zhang; Luojin Liu; Peiju Mao; Chunxiang Guo; Jiangang Li; Zhenfu Wang; Shoujun Bai; Shuangjie Shi; Yafang Wang; Jinwei Wang; Zhangsuo Liu; Fang Wang; Dandan Huang; Shun Wang; Shuwang Ge; Quanquan Shen; Ping Zhang; Lihua Wu; Miao Pan; Xiting Zou; Ping Zhu; Jintao Zhao; Minjie Zhou; Lin Yang; Wenping Hu; Jing Wang; Bing Liu; Tong Zhang; Jianxin Han; Tao Wen; Minghui Zhao; Haiyan Wang
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2015-10-10       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Prediction and Risk Stratification of Kidney Outcomes in IgA Nephropathy.

Authors:  Tingyu Chen; Xiang Li; Yingxue Li; Eryu Xia; Yong Qin; Shaoshan Liang; Feng Xu; Dandan Liang; Caihong Zeng; Zhihong Liu
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2019-04-25       Impact factor: 8.860

Review 4.  Pathophysiology of acute kidney injury.

Authors:  David P Basile; Melissa D Anderson; Timothy A Sutton
Journal:  Compr Physiol       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 9.090

5.  Acute kidney injury in a Chinese hospitalized population.

Authors:  Yi Fang; Xiaoqiang Ding; Yihong Zhong; Jianzhou Zou; Jie Teng; Ying Tang; Jing Lin; Pan Lin
Journal:  Blood Purif       Date:  2010-08-14       Impact factor: 2.614

Review 6.  Management of patients at risk of acute kidney injury.

Authors:  Jill Vanmassenhove; Jan Kielstein; Achim Jörres; Wim Van Biesen
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2017-05-27       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Effect of Early vs Delayed Initiation of Renal Replacement Therapy on Mortality in Critically Ill Patients With Acute Kidney Injury: The ELAIN Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Alexander Zarbock; John A Kellum; Christoph Schmidt; Hugo Van Aken; Carola Wempe; Hermann Pavenstädt; Andreea Boanta; Joachim Gerß; Melanie Meersch
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2016 May 24-31       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  A new equation to estimate glomerular filtration rate.

Authors:  Andrew S Levey; Lesley A Stevens; Christopher H Schmid; Yaping Lucy Zhang; Alejandro F Castro; Harold I Feldman; John W Kusek; Paul Eggers; Frederick Van Lente; Tom Greene; Josef Coresh
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2009-05-05       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  A comparative study of machine learning algorithms for predicting acute kidney injury after liver cancer resection.

Authors:  Lei Lei; Ying Wang; Qiong Xue; Jianhua Tong; Cheng-Mao Zhou; Jian-Jun Yang
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 2.984

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.