| Literature DB >> 35507636 |
Satoshi Nishioka1, Tomomi Watanabe1, Masaki Asano1, Tatsunori Yamamoto1, Kazuyoshi Kawakami2, Shuntaro Yada3, Eiji Aramaki3, Hiroshi Yajima4, Hayato Kizaki1, Satoko Hori1.
Abstract
Early detection and management of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is crucial for improving patients' quality of life. Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is one of the most problematic ADRs for cancer patients. Recently, an increasing number of patients post their daily experiences to internet community, for example in blogs, where potential ADR signals not captured through routine clinic visits can be described. Therefore, this study aimed to identify patients with potential ADRs, focusing on HFS, from internet blogs by using natural language processing (NLP) deep-learning methods. From 10,646 blog posts, written in Japanese by cancer patients, 149 HFS-positive sentences were extracted after pre-processing, annotation and scrutiny by a certified oncology pharmacist. The HFS-positive sentences described not only HFS typical expressions like "pain" or "spoon nail", but also patient-derived unique expressions like onomatopoeic ones. The dataset was divided at a 4 to 1 ratio and used to train and evaluate three NLP deep-learning models: long short-term memory (LSTM), bidirectional LSTM and bidirectional encoder representations from transformers (BERT). The BERT model gave the best performance with precision 0.63, recall 0.82 and f1 score 0.71 in the HFS user identification task. Our results demonstrate that this NLP deep-learning model can successfully identify patients with potential HFS from blog posts, where patients' real wordings on symptoms or impacts on their daily lives are described. Thus, it should be feasible to utilize patient-generated text data to improve ADR management for individual patients.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35507636 PMCID: PMC9067685 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267901
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.752
Fig 1Overview of data processing and deep learning.
Annotation guideline.
| Definition | Hand-foot syndrome-like symptoms possibly caused by anti-cancer drug |
|---|---|
| Positive criteria | Including at least one term listed below, being described with hand-foot-relevant terms. |
| Exclusion criteria | • Symptoms not on-going (i.e., already recovered, possibility for the future, description of general symptoms, reference to other source articles, imagination) |
Examples of HFS positive sentences.
| Japanese | English (translated for reference) |
|---|---|
| ところが、4月後半になると階段を上るときに足に痛みを感じるようになった。 | However, in the latter half of April, I started to feel pain in my legs when I climbed the stairs. |
| どうも僕の指の爪は、スプーン爪と呼ばれる状態になっているらしい。 | Apparently my fingernails are in a state called spoon nails. |
| ちょっと爪先がどこかに当たっただけではがれて2枚爪になったりするし、ポロポロと欠けることも多い。 | If the tip of my nail hits somewhere, it will come off and split into two, and it will often be chipped. |
| 朝から、手のひら、足裏が真っ赤。 | From the morning, the palms and soles are bright red. |
| 手の皮がべろべろに剥けている。 | The skin of my hands is peeling off like BERO-BERO (seriously). |
| 足のブヨブヨは、すっかり固くなってる感じ。 | The BUYO-BUYO (something like blisters) on my feet is becoming completely stiff. |
Statistical parameters for HFS-positive sentences.
| # of HFS-positive sentences (sentences) | 149 |
| Length of HFS-positive sentences (words) | |
| • Mean | 52.06 |
| • Mean (Min–Max) | 37 (11–235) |
| # of blog posts that included HFS-positive sentences (articles) … [*1] | 110 |
| • Out of which [*1], # of blog posts that also included specific anti-cancer drug names (articles) … [*2] | 25 |
| • Out of which [*2], # of blog posts that described timing of starting the anti-cancer drug (articles) | 4 |
| # of patients who posted HFS-positive blog posts (people) | 42 |
| # of posted HFS sentences per patient (sentences) | |
| • Mean | 3.55 |
| • Mean (Min–Max) | 2 (1–24) |
Performance score.
| a. Sentence task | |||
| Precision | Recall | f1 score | |
| LSTM | |||
| Original | 0.28 | 0.20 | 0.23 |
| Balanced | 0.10 | 0.96 | 0.19 |
| Under-sampling | 0.41 | 0.33 | 0.37 |
| Bi-LSTM | |||
| Original | 0.35 | 0.33 | 0.34 |
| Balanced | 0.15 | 0.86 | 0.26 |
| Under-sampling | 0.33 | 0.46 | 0.38 |
| BERT | |||
| Original | 0.43 | 0.23 | 0.30 |
| Balanced | 0.03 | 0.56 | 0.07 |
| Under-sampling | 0.45 | 0.66 | 0.54 |
| b. User task | |||
| Precision | Recall | f1 score | |
| LSTM | |||
| Original | 0.66 | 0.52 | 0.58 |
| Balanced | 0.23 | 1.00 | 0.37 |
| Under-sampling | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 |
| Bi-LSTM | |||
| Original | 0.65 | 0.68 | 0.66 |
| Balanced | 0.30 | 1.00 | 0.46 |
| Under-sampling | 0.50 | 0.68 | 0.57 |
| BERT | |||
| Original | 0.53 | 0.36 | 0.43 |
| Balanced | 0.13 | 0.93 | 0.23 |
| Under-sampling | 0.63 | 0.82 | 0.71 |
Precision, recall and f1 scores are shown in these tables for the sentence task (a) and the user task (b). NLP deep-learning models used for this study are LSTM, Bi-LSTM and BERT. The percentage of positive data in the training dataset is approx. 2.7% for “Original” (the same ratio as in the original population), 50% for “Balanced” and 5% for “Under-sampling”.