Cargando…

Development of Interpretable Predictive Models for BPH and Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND: Traditional methods for deciding whether to recommend a patient for a prostate biopsy are based on cut-off levels of stand-alone markers such as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or any of its derivatives. However, in the last decade we have seen the increasing use of predictive models tha...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bermejo, Pablo, Vivo, Alicia, Tárraga, Pedro J, Rodríguez-Montes, JA
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Libertas Academica 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4345941/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25780348
http://dx.doi.org/10.4137/CMO.S19739
_version_ 1782359658032267264
author Bermejo, Pablo
Vivo, Alicia
Tárraga, Pedro J
Rodríguez-Montes, JA
author_facet Bermejo, Pablo
Vivo, Alicia
Tárraga, Pedro J
Rodríguez-Montes, JA
author_sort Bermejo, Pablo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Traditional methods for deciding whether to recommend a patient for a prostate biopsy are based on cut-off levels of stand-alone markers such as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or any of its derivatives. However, in the last decade we have seen the increasing use of predictive models that combine, in a non-linear manner, several predictives that are better able to predict prostate cancer (PC), but these fail to help the clinician to distinguish between PC and benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) patients. We construct two new models that are capable of predicting both PC and BPH. METHODS: An observational study was performed on 150 patients with PSA ≥3 ng/mL and age >50 years. We built a decision tree and a logistic regression model, validated with the leave-one-out methodology, in order to predict PC or BPH, or reject both. RESULTS: Statistical dependence with PC and BPH was found for prostate volume (P-value < 0.001), PSA (P-value < 0.001), international prostate symptom score (IPSS; P-value < 0.001), digital rectal examination (DRE; P-value < 0.001), age (P-value < 0.002), antecedents (P-value < 0.006), and meat consumption (P-value < 0.08). The two predictive models that were constructed selected a subset of these, namely, volume, PSA, DRE, and IPSS, obtaining an area under the ROC curve (AUC) between 72% and 80% for both PC and BPH prediction. CONCLUSION: PSA and volume together help to build predictive models that accurately distinguish among PC, BPH, and patients without any of these pathologies. Our decision tree and logistic regression models outperform the AUC obtained in the compared studies. Using these models as decision support, the number of unnecessary biopsies might be significantly reduced.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4345941
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Libertas Academica
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43459412015-03-16 Development of Interpretable Predictive Models for BPH and Prostate Cancer Bermejo, Pablo Vivo, Alicia Tárraga, Pedro J Rodríguez-Montes, JA Clin Med Insights Oncol Original Research BACKGROUND: Traditional methods for deciding whether to recommend a patient for a prostate biopsy are based on cut-off levels of stand-alone markers such as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or any of its derivatives. However, in the last decade we have seen the increasing use of predictive models that combine, in a non-linear manner, several predictives that are better able to predict prostate cancer (PC), but these fail to help the clinician to distinguish between PC and benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) patients. We construct two new models that are capable of predicting both PC and BPH. METHODS: An observational study was performed on 150 patients with PSA ≥3 ng/mL and age >50 years. We built a decision tree and a logistic regression model, validated with the leave-one-out methodology, in order to predict PC or BPH, or reject both. RESULTS: Statistical dependence with PC and BPH was found for prostate volume (P-value < 0.001), PSA (P-value < 0.001), international prostate symptom score (IPSS; P-value < 0.001), digital rectal examination (DRE; P-value < 0.001), age (P-value < 0.002), antecedents (P-value < 0.006), and meat consumption (P-value < 0.08). The two predictive models that were constructed selected a subset of these, namely, volume, PSA, DRE, and IPSS, obtaining an area under the ROC curve (AUC) between 72% and 80% for both PC and BPH prediction. CONCLUSION: PSA and volume together help to build predictive models that accurately distinguish among PC, BPH, and patients without any of these pathologies. Our decision tree and logistic regression models outperform the AUC obtained in the compared studies. Using these models as decision support, the number of unnecessary biopsies might be significantly reduced. Libertas Academica 2015-02-25 /pmc/articles/PMC4345941/ /pubmed/25780348 http://dx.doi.org/10.4137/CMO.S19739 Text en © 2015 the author(s), publisher and licensee Libertas Academica Ltd. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY-NC 3.0 License.
spellingShingle Original Research
Bermejo, Pablo
Vivo, Alicia
Tárraga, Pedro J
Rodríguez-Montes, JA
Development of Interpretable Predictive Models for BPH and Prostate Cancer
title Development of Interpretable Predictive Models for BPH and Prostate Cancer
title_full Development of Interpretable Predictive Models for BPH and Prostate Cancer
title_fullStr Development of Interpretable Predictive Models for BPH and Prostate Cancer
title_full_unstemmed Development of Interpretable Predictive Models for BPH and Prostate Cancer
title_short Development of Interpretable Predictive Models for BPH and Prostate Cancer
title_sort development of interpretable predictive models for bph and prostate cancer
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4345941/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25780348
http://dx.doi.org/10.4137/CMO.S19739
work_keys_str_mv AT bermejopablo developmentofinterpretablepredictivemodelsforbphandprostatecancer
AT vivoalicia developmentofinterpretablepredictivemodelsforbphandprostatecancer
AT tarragapedroj developmentofinterpretablepredictivemodelsforbphandprostatecancer
AT rodriguezmontesja developmentofinterpretablepredictivemodelsforbphandprostatecancer