Cargando…
A comparison of machine learning models and Cox proportional hazards models regarding their ability to predict the risk of gastrointestinal cancer based on metabolic syndrome and its components
BACKGROUND: Little is known about applying machine learning (ML) techniques to identify the important variables contributing to the occurrence of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer in epidemiological studies. We aimed to compare different ML models to a Cox proportional hazards (CPH) model regarding their...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10018751/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36937438 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1049787 |
_version_ | 1784907879738769408 |
---|---|
author | Tran, Tao Thi Lee, Jeonghee Gunathilake, Madhawa Kim, Junetae Kim, Sun-Young Cho, Hyunsoon Kim, Jeongseon |
author_facet | Tran, Tao Thi Lee, Jeonghee Gunathilake, Madhawa Kim, Junetae Kim, Sun-Young Cho, Hyunsoon Kim, Jeongseon |
author_sort | Tran, Tao Thi |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Little is known about applying machine learning (ML) techniques to identify the important variables contributing to the occurrence of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer in epidemiological studies. We aimed to compare different ML models to a Cox proportional hazards (CPH) model regarding their ability to predict the risk of GI cancer based on metabolic syndrome (MetS) and its components. METHODS: A total of 41,837 participants were included in a prospective cohort study. Incident cancer cases were identified by following up with participants until December 2019. We used CPH, random survival forest (RSF), survival trees (ST), gradient boosting (GB), survival support vector machine (SSVM), and extra survival trees (EST) models to explore the impact of MetS on GI cancer prediction. We used the C-index and integrated Brier score (IBS) to compare the models. RESULTS: In all, 540 incident GI cancer cases were identified. The GB and SSVM models exhibited comparable performance to the CPH model concerning the C-index (0.725). We also recorded a similar IBS for all models (0.017). Fasting glucose and waist circumference were considered important predictors. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found comparably good performance concerning the C-index for the ML models and CPH model. This finding suggests that ML models may be considered another method for survival analysis when the CPH model’s conditions are not satisfied. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10018751 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100187512023-03-17 A comparison of machine learning models and Cox proportional hazards models regarding their ability to predict the risk of gastrointestinal cancer based on metabolic syndrome and its components Tran, Tao Thi Lee, Jeonghee Gunathilake, Madhawa Kim, Junetae Kim, Sun-Young Cho, Hyunsoon Kim, Jeongseon Front Oncol Oncology BACKGROUND: Little is known about applying machine learning (ML) techniques to identify the important variables contributing to the occurrence of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer in epidemiological studies. We aimed to compare different ML models to a Cox proportional hazards (CPH) model regarding their ability to predict the risk of GI cancer based on metabolic syndrome (MetS) and its components. METHODS: A total of 41,837 participants were included in a prospective cohort study. Incident cancer cases were identified by following up with participants until December 2019. We used CPH, random survival forest (RSF), survival trees (ST), gradient boosting (GB), survival support vector machine (SSVM), and extra survival trees (EST) models to explore the impact of MetS on GI cancer prediction. We used the C-index and integrated Brier score (IBS) to compare the models. RESULTS: In all, 540 incident GI cancer cases were identified. The GB and SSVM models exhibited comparable performance to the CPH model concerning the C-index (0.725). We also recorded a similar IBS for all models (0.017). Fasting glucose and waist circumference were considered important predictors. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found comparably good performance concerning the C-index for the ML models and CPH model. This finding suggests that ML models may be considered another method for survival analysis when the CPH model’s conditions are not satisfied. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-03-02 /pmc/articles/PMC10018751/ /pubmed/36937438 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1049787 Text en Copyright © 2023 Tran, Lee, Gunathilake, Kim, Kim, Cho and Kim https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Oncology Tran, Tao Thi Lee, Jeonghee Gunathilake, Madhawa Kim, Junetae Kim, Sun-Young Cho, Hyunsoon Kim, Jeongseon A comparison of machine learning models and Cox proportional hazards models regarding their ability to predict the risk of gastrointestinal cancer based on metabolic syndrome and its components |
title | A comparison of machine learning models and Cox proportional hazards models regarding their ability to predict the risk of gastrointestinal cancer based on metabolic syndrome and its components |
title_full | A comparison of machine learning models and Cox proportional hazards models regarding their ability to predict the risk of gastrointestinal cancer based on metabolic syndrome and its components |
title_fullStr | A comparison of machine learning models and Cox proportional hazards models regarding their ability to predict the risk of gastrointestinal cancer based on metabolic syndrome and its components |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of machine learning models and Cox proportional hazards models regarding their ability to predict the risk of gastrointestinal cancer based on metabolic syndrome and its components |
title_short | A comparison of machine learning models and Cox proportional hazards models regarding their ability to predict the risk of gastrointestinal cancer based on metabolic syndrome and its components |
title_sort | comparison of machine learning models and cox proportional hazards models regarding their ability to predict the risk of gastrointestinal cancer based on metabolic syndrome and its components |
topic | Oncology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10018751/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36937438 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1049787 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT trantaothi acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsandcoxproportionalhazardsmodelsregardingtheirabilitytopredicttheriskofgastrointestinalcancerbasedonmetabolicsyndromeanditscomponents AT leejeonghee acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsandcoxproportionalhazardsmodelsregardingtheirabilitytopredicttheriskofgastrointestinalcancerbasedonmetabolicsyndromeanditscomponents AT gunathilakemadhawa acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsandcoxproportionalhazardsmodelsregardingtheirabilitytopredicttheriskofgastrointestinalcancerbasedonmetabolicsyndromeanditscomponents AT kimjunetae acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsandcoxproportionalhazardsmodelsregardingtheirabilitytopredicttheriskofgastrointestinalcancerbasedonmetabolicsyndromeanditscomponents AT kimsunyoung acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsandcoxproportionalhazardsmodelsregardingtheirabilitytopredicttheriskofgastrointestinalcancerbasedonmetabolicsyndromeanditscomponents AT chohyunsoon acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsandcoxproportionalhazardsmodelsregardingtheirabilitytopredicttheriskofgastrointestinalcancerbasedonmetabolicsyndromeanditscomponents AT kimjeongseon acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsandcoxproportionalhazardsmodelsregardingtheirabilitytopredicttheriskofgastrointestinalcancerbasedonmetabolicsyndromeanditscomponents AT trantaothi comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsandcoxproportionalhazardsmodelsregardingtheirabilitytopredicttheriskofgastrointestinalcancerbasedonmetabolicsyndromeanditscomponents AT leejeonghee comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsandcoxproportionalhazardsmodelsregardingtheirabilitytopredicttheriskofgastrointestinalcancerbasedonmetabolicsyndromeanditscomponents AT gunathilakemadhawa comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsandcoxproportionalhazardsmodelsregardingtheirabilitytopredicttheriskofgastrointestinalcancerbasedonmetabolicsyndromeanditscomponents AT kimjunetae comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsandcoxproportionalhazardsmodelsregardingtheirabilitytopredicttheriskofgastrointestinalcancerbasedonmetabolicsyndromeanditscomponents AT kimsunyoung comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsandcoxproportionalhazardsmodelsregardingtheirabilitytopredicttheriskofgastrointestinalcancerbasedonmetabolicsyndromeanditscomponents AT chohyunsoon comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsandcoxproportionalhazardsmodelsregardingtheirabilitytopredicttheriskofgastrointestinalcancerbasedonmetabolicsyndromeanditscomponents AT kimjeongseon comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsandcoxproportionalhazardsmodelsregardingtheirabilitytopredicttheriskofgastrointestinalcancerbasedonmetabolicsyndromeanditscomponents |