• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

机器学习在前列腺癌病理分期中的应用:一系列分类器的性能比较。

Machine learning for improved pathological staging of prostate cancer: a performance comparison on a range of classifiers.

机构信息

IDEAS Research Institute, Robert Gordon University, St. Andrew Street, Aberdeen AB25 1HG, UK.

出版信息

Artif Intell Med. 2012 May;55(1):25-35. doi: 10.1016/j.artmed.2011.11.003. Epub 2011 Dec 27.

DOI:10.1016/j.artmed.2011.11.003
PMID:22206941
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Prediction of prostate cancer pathological stage is an essential step in a patient's pathway. It determines the treatment that will be applied further. In current practice, urologists use the pathological stage predictions provided in Partin tables to support their decisions. However, Partin tables are based on logistic regression (LR) and built from US data. Our objective is to investigate a range of both predictive methods and of predictive variables for pathological stage prediction and assess them with respect to their predictive quality based on U.K. data.

METHODS AND MATERIAL

The latest version of Partin tables was applied to a large scale British dataset in order to measure their performances by mean of concordance index (c-index). The data was collected by the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) and gathered records from over 1700 patients treated with prostatectomy in 57 centers across UK. The original methodology was replicated using the BAUS dataset and evaluated using concordance index. In addition, a selection of classifiers, including, among others, LR, artificial neural networks and Bayesian networks (BNs) was applied to the same data and compared with each other using the area under the ROC curve (AUC). Subsets of the data were created in order to observe how classifiers perform with the inclusion of extra variables. Finally a local dataset prepared by the Aberdeen Royal Infirmary was used to study the effect on predictive performance of using different variables.

RESULTS

Partin tables have low predictive quality (c-index=0.602) when applied on UK data for comparison on patients with organ confined and extra prostatic extension conditions, patients at the two most frequently observed pathological stages. The use of replicate lookup tables built from British data shows an improvement in the classification, but the overall predictive quality remains low (c-index=0.610). Comparing a range of classifiers shows that BNs generally outperform other methods. Using the four variables from Partin tables, naive Bayes is the best classifier for the prediction of each class label (AUC=0.662 for OC). When two additional variables are added, the results of LR (0.675), artificial neural networks (0.656) and BN methods (0.679) are overall improved. BNs show higher AUCs than the other methods when the number of variables raises

CONCLUSION

The predictive quality of Partin tables can be described as low to moderate on U.K. data. This means that following the predictions generated by Partin tables, many patients would received an inappropriate treatment, generally associated with a deterioration of their quality of life. In addition to demographic differences between U.K. and the original U.S. population, the methodology and in particular LR present limitations. BN represents a promising alternative to LR from which prostate cancer staging can benefit. Heuristic search for structure learning and the inclusion of more variables are elements that further improve BN models quality.

摘要

目的

预测前列腺癌病理分期是患者治疗路径中的一个重要步骤。它决定了将采用的治疗方法。目前,泌尿科医生使用《Partin 表》中提供的病理分期预测来支持他们的决策。然而,《Partin 表》是基于逻辑回归(LR)并基于美国数据建立的。我们的目标是研究一系列用于病理分期预测的预测方法和预测变量,并根据英国数据评估它们的预测质量。

方法和材料

将最新版本的《Partin 表》应用于英国的大型数据集,通过一致性指数(c-index)来衡量它们的性能。该数据由英国泌尿科医师协会(BAUS)收集,来自英国 57 个中心的 1700 多名接受前列腺切除术治疗的患者记录。使用 BAUS 数据集复制了原始方法,并使用一致性指数进行了评估。此外,还应用了包括逻辑回归、人工神经网络和贝叶斯网络(BN)在内的一系列分类器,并使用 ROC 曲线下的面积(AUC)进行了比较。创建了数据集的子集,以便观察随着额外变量的纳入,分类器的表现如何。最后,使用阿伯丁皇家医院准备的本地数据集研究了使用不同变量对预测性能的影响。

结果

当将《Partin 表》应用于英国数据以比较局限于器官和前列腺外延伸的患者和最常观察到的两个病理阶段的患者时,其预测质量(c-index=0.602)较低。使用从英国数据构建的重复查找表可提高分类效果,但整体预测质量仍然较低(c-index=0.610)。比较一系列分类器表明,BN 通常优于其他方法。使用《Partin 表》中的四个变量,朴素贝叶斯是预测每个类别标签的最佳分类器(OC 的 AUC=0.662)。当添加两个额外变量时,LR(0.675)、人工神经网络(0.656)和 BN 方法(0.679)的结果总体上得到了提高。当变量数量增加时,BN 的 AUC 高于其他方法。

结论

《Partin 表》的预测质量在英国数据上可以说是低到中等。这意味着,根据《Partin 表》生成的预测,许多患者将接受不适当的治疗,通常会导致他们的生活质量恶化。除了英国和原始美国人群之间的人口统计学差异外,方法,特别是 LR 存在局限性。BN 是 LR 的一种有前途的替代方法,前列腺癌分期可以从中受益。结构学习的启发式搜索和更多变量的纳入是进一步提高 BN 模型质量的要素。

相似文献

1
Machine learning for improved pathological staging of prostate cancer: a performance comparison on a range of classifiers.机器学习在前列腺癌病理分期中的应用:一系列分类器的性能比较。
Artif Intell Med. 2012 May;55(1):25-35. doi: 10.1016/j.artmed.2011.11.003. Epub 2011 Dec 27.
2
Validation of Partin tables and development of a preoperative nomogram for Japanese patients with clinically localized prostate cancer using 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology consensus on Gleason grading: data from the Clinicopathological Research Group for Localized Prostate Cancer.使用2005年国际泌尿病理学会关于Gleason分级的共识,对日本临床局限性前列腺癌患者进行Partin表验证及术前列线图的开发:来自局限性前列腺癌临床病理研究组的数据
J Urol. 2008 Sep;180(3):904-9; discussion 909-10. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.05.047. Epub 2008 Jul 17.
3
The newer the better? Comparison of the 1997 and 2001 partin tables for pathologic stage prediction of prostate cancer in China.越新越好?1997年与2001年Partin表对中国前列腺癌病理分期预测的比较
Urology. 2008 Nov;72(5):1096-101. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2008.07.047. Epub 2008 Sep 26.
4
Validation of Partin tables for predicting pathological stage of clinically localized prostate cancer.验证Partin表在预测临床局限性前列腺癌病理分期中的应用
J Urol. 2000 Nov;164(5):1591-5.
5
Comparison of accuracy among three generations of Partin tables in a Chinese cohort.中国队列中三代帕廷表格准确性的比较。
Can J Urol. 2011 Apr;18(2):5619-24.
6
Comparison of accuracy between the Partin tables of 1997 and 2001 to predict final pathological stage in clinically localized prostate cancer.1997年和2001年Partin表预测临床局限性前列腺癌最终病理分期的准确性比较。
J Urol. 2004 Jan;171(1):177-81. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000099827.77355.a7.
7
Validation of 2001 Partin tables in Turkey: a multicenter study.2001年帕廷表格在土耳其的验证:一项多中心研究。
Eur Urol. 2005 Feb;47(2):185-9. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2004.08.002.
8
Multi-institutional external validation of seminal vesicle invasion nomograms: head-to-head comparison of Gallina nomogram versus 2007 Partin tables.精囊侵犯列线图的多机构外部验证:加利纳列线图与2007年帕廷表格的直接比较
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Apr 1;73(5):1461-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.06.1913. Epub 2008 Oct 19.
9
The use of neural networks and logistic regression analysis for predicting pathological stage in men undergoing radical prostatectomy: a population based study.使用神经网络和逻辑回归分析预测接受根治性前列腺切除术男性的病理分期:一项基于人群的研究。
J Urol. 2001 Nov;166(5):1672-8.
10
Can Radiologic Staging With Multiparametric MRI Enhance the Accuracy of the Partin Tables in Predicting Organ-Confined Prostate Cancer?多参数磁共振成像的放射学分期能否提高Partin表预测局限性前列腺癌的准确性?
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016 Jul;207(1):87-95. doi: 10.2214/AJR.15.15878. Epub 2016 Apr 11.

引用本文的文献

1
The value of artificial intelligence for detection and grading of prostate cancer in human prostatectomy specimens: a validation study.人工智能在人前列腺切除标本中检测和分级前列腺癌的价值:一项验证研究。
Patient Saf Surg. 2022 Nov 23;16(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s13037-022-00345-6.
2
A systematic review of the applications of Expert Systems (ES) and machine learning (ML) in clinical urology.专家系统(ES)和机器学习(ML)在临床泌尿外科应用的系统评价。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2021 Jul 22;21(1):223. doi: 10.1186/s12911-021-01585-9.
3
Identification of a Transcriptomic Prognostic Signature by Machine Learning Using a Combination of Small Cohorts of Prostate Cancer.
通过机器学习结合小样本前列腺癌队列鉴定转录组预后特征
Front Genet. 2020 Nov 25;11:550894. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2020.550894. eCollection 2020.
4
Development and validation of a machine learning-based predictive model to improve the prediction of inguinal status of anal cancer patients: A preliminary report.基于机器学习的预测模型的开发与验证,以改善肛管癌患者腹股沟状态的预测:初步报告
Oncotarget. 2016 Jul 21;8(65):108509-108521. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.10749. eCollection 2017 Dec 12.
5
Applying Naive Bayesian Networks to Disease Prediction: a Systematic Review.将朴素贝叶斯网络应用于疾病预测:一项系统综述。
Acta Inform Med. 2016 Oct;24(5):364-369. doi: 10.5455/aim.2016.24.364-369. Epub 2016 Nov 1.
6
Detection of independent associations in a large epidemiologic dataset: a comparison of random forests, boosted regression trees, conventional and penalized logistic regression for identifying independent factors associated with H1N1pdm influenza infections.在大型流行病学数据集中检测独立关联:随机森林、增强回归树、传统和惩罚逻辑回归在识别与2009年甲型H1N1流感感染相关的独立因素方面的比较。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014 Aug 26;14:99. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-14-99.
7
Predicting increased blood pressure using machine learning.使用机器学习预测血压升高。
J Obes. 2014;2014:637635. doi: 10.1155/2014/637635. Epub 2014 Jan 23.
8
Artificial neural networks and prostate cancer--tools for diagnosis and management.人工神经网络与前列腺癌——诊断与治疗工具。
Nat Rev Urol. 2013 Mar;10(3):174-82. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2013.9. Epub 2013 Feb 12.