Cargando…
A comparison of machine learning models for predicting urinary incontinence in men with localized prostate cancer
INTRODUCTION: Urinary incontinence (UI) is a common side effect of prostate cancer treatment, but in clinical practice, it is difficult to predict. Machine learning (ML) models have shown promising results in predicting outcomes, yet the lack of transparency in complex models known as “black-box” ha...
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/PMC10130634/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37124522 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1168219 |
_version_ | 1785030999923490816 |
---|---|
author | Hasannejadasl, Hajar Osong, Biche Bermejo, Inigo van der Poel, Henk Vanneste, Ben van Roermund, Joep Aben, Katja Zhang, Zhen Kiemeney, Lambertus Van Oort, Inge Verwey, Renee Hochstenbach, Laura Bloemen, Esther Dekker, Andre Fijten, Rianne R. R. |
author_facet | Hasannejadasl, Hajar Osong, Biche Bermejo, Inigo van der Poel, Henk Vanneste, Ben van Roermund, Joep Aben, Katja Zhang, Zhen Kiemeney, Lambertus Van Oort, Inge Verwey, Renee Hochstenbach, Laura Bloemen, Esther Dekker, Andre Fijten, Rianne R. R. |
author_sort | Hasannejadasl, Hajar |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Urinary incontinence (UI) is a common side effect of prostate cancer treatment, but in clinical practice, it is difficult to predict. Machine learning (ML) models have shown promising results in predicting outcomes, yet the lack of transparency in complex models known as “black-box” has made clinicians wary of relying on them in sensitive decisions. Therefore, finding a balance between accuracy and explainability is crucial for the implementation of ML models. The aim of this study was to employ three different ML classifiers to predict the probability of experiencing UI in men with localized prostate cancer 1-year and 2-year after treatment and compare their accuracy and explainability. METHODS: We used the ProZIB dataset from the Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (Integraal Kankercentrum Nederland; IKNL) which contained clinical, demographic, and PROM data of 964 patients from 65 Dutch hospitals. Logistic Regression (LR), Random Forest (RF), and Support Vector Machine (SVM) algorithms were applied to predict (in)continence after prostate cancer treatment. RESULTS: All models have been externally validated according to the TRIPOD Type 3 guidelines and their performance was assessed by accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and AUC. While all three models demonstrated similar performance, LR showed slightly better accuracy than RF and SVM in predicting the risk of UI one year after prostate cancer treatment, achieving an accuracy of 0.75, a sensitivity of 0.82, and an AUC of 0.79. All models for the 2-year outcome performed poorly in the validation set, with an accuracy of 0.6 for LR, 0.65 for RF, and 0.54 for SVM. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of our study demonstrate the promise of using non-black box models, such as LR, to assist clinicians in recognizing high-risk patients and making informed treatment choices. The coefficients of the LR model show the importance of each feature in predicting results, and the generated nomogram provides an accessible illustration of how each feature impacts the predicted outcome. Additionally, the model’s simplicity and interpretability make it a more appropriate option in scenarios where comprehending the model’s predictions is essential. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10130634 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101306342023-04-27 A comparison of machine learning models for predicting urinary incontinence in men with localized prostate cancer Hasannejadasl, Hajar Osong, Biche Bermejo, Inigo van der Poel, Henk Vanneste, Ben van Roermund, Joep Aben, Katja Zhang, Zhen Kiemeney, Lambertus Van Oort, Inge Verwey, Renee Hochstenbach, Laura Bloemen, Esther Dekker, Andre Fijten, Rianne R. R. Front Oncol Oncology INTRODUCTION: Urinary incontinence (UI) is a common side effect of prostate cancer treatment, but in clinical practice, it is difficult to predict. Machine learning (ML) models have shown promising results in predicting outcomes, yet the lack of transparency in complex models known as “black-box” has made clinicians wary of relying on them in sensitive decisions. Therefore, finding a balance between accuracy and explainability is crucial for the implementation of ML models. The aim of this study was to employ three different ML classifiers to predict the probability of experiencing UI in men with localized prostate cancer 1-year and 2-year after treatment and compare their accuracy and explainability. METHODS: We used the ProZIB dataset from the Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (Integraal Kankercentrum Nederland; IKNL) which contained clinical, demographic, and PROM data of 964 patients from 65 Dutch hospitals. Logistic Regression (LR), Random Forest (RF), and Support Vector Machine (SVM) algorithms were applied to predict (in)continence after prostate cancer treatment. RESULTS: All models have been externally validated according to the TRIPOD Type 3 guidelines and their performance was assessed by accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and AUC. While all three models demonstrated similar performance, LR showed slightly better accuracy than RF and SVM in predicting the risk of UI one year after prostate cancer treatment, achieving an accuracy of 0.75, a sensitivity of 0.82, and an AUC of 0.79. All models for the 2-year outcome performed poorly in the validation set, with an accuracy of 0.6 for LR, 0.65 for RF, and 0.54 for SVM. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of our study demonstrate the promise of using non-black box models, such as LR, to assist clinicians in recognizing high-risk patients and making informed treatment choices. The coefficients of the LR model show the importance of each feature in predicting results, and the generated nomogram provides an accessible illustration of how each feature impacts the predicted outcome. Additionally, the model’s simplicity and interpretability make it a more appropriate option in scenarios where comprehending the model’s predictions is essential. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-04-12 /pmc/articles/PMC10130634/ /pubmed/37124522 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1168219 Text en Copyright © 2023 Hasannejadasl, Osong, Bermejo, van der Poel, Vanneste, van Roermund, Aben, Zhang, Kiemeney, Van Oort, Verwey, Hochstenbach, Bloemen, Dekker and Fijten 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 Hasannejadasl, Hajar Osong, Biche Bermejo, Inigo van der Poel, Henk Vanneste, Ben van Roermund, Joep Aben, Katja Zhang, Zhen Kiemeney, Lambertus Van Oort, Inge Verwey, Renee Hochstenbach, Laura Bloemen, Esther Dekker, Andre Fijten, Rianne R. R. A comparison of machine learning models for predicting urinary incontinence in men with localized prostate cancer |
title | A comparison of machine learning models for predicting urinary incontinence in men with localized prostate cancer |
title_full | A comparison of machine learning models for predicting urinary incontinence in men with localized prostate cancer |
title_fullStr | A comparison of machine learning models for predicting urinary incontinence in men with localized prostate cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of machine learning models for predicting urinary incontinence in men with localized prostate cancer |
title_short | A comparison of machine learning models for predicting urinary incontinence in men with localized prostate cancer |
title_sort | comparison of machine learning models for predicting urinary incontinence in men with localized prostate cancer |
topic | Oncology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10130634/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37124522 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1168219 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hasannejadaslhajar acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT osongbiche acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT bermejoinigo acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT vanderpoelhenk acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT vannesteben acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT vanroermundjoep acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT abenkatja acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT zhangzhen acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT kiemeneylambertus acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT vanoortinge acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT verweyrenee acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT hochstenbachlaura acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT bloemenesther acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT dekkerandre acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT fijtenriannerr acomparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT hasannejadaslhajar comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT osongbiche comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT bermejoinigo comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT vanderpoelhenk comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT vannesteben comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT vanroermundjoep comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT abenkatja comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT zhangzhen comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT kiemeneylambertus comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT vanoortinge comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT verweyrenee comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT hochstenbachlaura comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT bloemenesther comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT dekkerandre comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer AT fijtenriannerr comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforpredictingurinaryincontinenceinmenwithlocalizedprostatecancer |