• 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

相似文献

1
Refining the Lung Allocation Score Models Fails to Improve Discrimination Performance.细化肺分配评分模型未能提高区分性能。
Chest. 2023 Jan;163(1):152-163. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2022.08.2217. Epub 2022 Aug 27.
2
Miscalibration of lung allocation models leads to inaccurate waitlist mortality predictions.肺分配模型的校准不当会导致不准确的候补者死亡率预测。
Am J Transplant. 2023 Jan;23(1):72-77. doi: 10.1016/j.ajt.2022.11.012. Epub 2023 Jan 11.
3
Impact of incorporating long-term survival for calculating transplant benefit in the US lung transplant allocation system.将长期生存纳入美国肺移植分配系统中计算移植获益的影响。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2022 Jul;41(7):866-873. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2022.02.012. Epub 2022 Feb 26.
4
Effect of broader geographic sharing of donor lungs on lung transplant waitlist outcomes.更广泛的供体肺地理共享对肺移植候补者结局的影响。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2019 Feb;38(2):136-144. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2018.09.007. Epub 2018 Sep 14.
5
Expected effect of the lung Composite Allocation Score system on US lung transplantation.肺综合分配评分系统对美国肺移植的预期效果。
Am J Transplant. 2022 Dec;22(12):2971-2980. doi: 10.1111/ajt.17160. Epub 2022 Aug 9.
6
Incorporating Effects of Time Accrued on the Waiting List into Lung Transplantation Survival Models.将等待名单上的时间累积效应纳入肺移植生存模型中。
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2023 Nov 1;208(9):983-989. doi: 10.1164/rccm.202306-0968OC.
7
OPTN/SRTR 2016 Annual Data Report: Lung.OPTN/SRTR 2016 年度数据报告:肺。
Am J Transplant. 2018 Jan;18 Suppl 1:363-433. doi: 10.1111/ajt.14562.
8
The lung allocation score and other available models lack predictive accuracy for post-lung transplant survival.肺分配评分和其他可用模型缺乏对肺移植后生存的预测准确性。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2022 Aug;41(8):1063-1074. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2022.05.008. Epub 2022 May 20.
9
Validating thoracic simulated allocation model predictions for impact of broader geographic sharing of donor lungs on transplant waitlist outcomes.验证胸腔模拟分配模型预测对更广泛的供体肺地理共享对移植候补者结局的影响。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2020 May;39(5):433-440. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2019.11.003. Epub 2019 Nov 21.
10
OPTN/SRTR 2015 Annual Data Report: Lung.器官获取与移植网络/器官共享联合网络2015年度数据报告:肺脏
Am J Transplant. 2017 Jan;17 Suppl 1:357-424. doi: 10.1111/ajt.14129.

引用本文的文献

1
Analysis of the most influential factors affecting outcomes of lung transplant recipients: a multivariate prediction model based on UNOS Data.影响肺移植受者结局的最具影响力因素分析:基于器官共享联合网络(UNOS)数据的多变量预测模型
BMJ Open. 2025 May 16;15(5):e089796. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-089796.
2
Application of artificial intelligence and machine learning in lung transplantation: a comprehensive review.人工智能和机器学习在肺移植中的应用:综述
Front Digit Health. 2025 May 1;7:1583490. doi: 10.3389/fdgth.2025.1583490. eCollection 2025.
3
National Organ Procurement and Transplant Network Heart Allocation Policy: 6 Years Later.国家器官获取与移植网络心脏分配政策:6年后
Circ Heart Fail. 2025 Jun;18(6):e011631. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.124.011631. Epub 2025 Mar 21.
4
Development of a Machine Learning-Powered Optimized Lung Allocation System for Maximum Benefits in Lung Transplantation: A Korean National Data.开发一种由机器学习驱动的优化肺分配系统以实现肺移植的最大效益:韩国国家数据。
J Korean Med Sci. 2025 Feb 24;40(7):e18. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2025.40.e18.
5
Scoring donor lungs for graft failure risk: The Lung Donor Risk Index (LDRI).为移植物衰竭风险对供体肺进行评分:肺供体风险指数(LDRI)。
Am J Transplant. 2024 May;24(5):839-849. doi: 10.1016/j.ajt.2024.01.022. Epub 2024 Jan 22.
6
A Hospitable Home? Cell-Free DNA and the Inflammatory Milieu in Lung Transplant Candidates.一个适宜的家?肺移植候选者中的游离DNA与炎症环境
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2024 Mar 15;209(6):627-628. doi: 10.1164/rccm.202312-2242ED.
7
Cell-Free DNA Maps Tissue Injury and Correlates with Disease Severity in Lung Transplant Candidates.游离DNA可绘制组织损伤图谱并与肺移植受者的疾病严重程度相关。
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2024 Mar 15;209(6):727-737. doi: 10.1164/rccm.202306-1064OC.
8
Lung Allocation Score Exceptions in Persons with Cystic Fibrosis Undergoing Lung Transplant.肺移植中囊性纤维化患者的肺分配评分例外。
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2024 Feb;21(2):271-278. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202306-509OC.
9
A new method for classifying prognostic risk factors in lung transplant candidates.一种用于分类肺移植候选者预后风险因素的新方法。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2023 Nov;42(11):1569-1577. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2023.06.009. Epub 2023 Jun 21.
10
Transplanting candidates with stacked risks negatively affects outcomes.移植候选人的风险叠加会对结果产生负面影响。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2023 Oct;42(10):1455-1463. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2023.05.020. Epub 2023 Jun 7.

本文引用的文献

1
Assessing the accuracy of the lung allocation score.评估肺分配评分的准确性。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2022 Feb;41(2):217-225. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2021.10.015. Epub 2021 Oct 28.
2
Evaluating Discrimination of Risk Prediction Models: The C Statistic.评估风险预测模型的判别力:C统计量
JAMA. 2015 Sep 8;314(10):1063-4. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.11082.
3
Clinical risk factors for primary graft dysfunction after lung transplantation.肺移植后原发性移植物功能障碍的临床危险因素。
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013 Mar 1;187(5):527-34. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201210-1865OC. Epub 2013 Jan 10.
4
Survival after bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome among bilateral lung transplant recipients.双侧肺移植受者闭塞性细支气管炎综合征后的生存情况。
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2010 Sep 15;182(6):784-9. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201002-0211OC. Epub 2010 May 27.
5
Development of a predictive model for long-term survival after lung transplantation and implications for the lung allocation score.肺移植后长期生存预测模型的建立及其对肺分配评分的影响。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2010 Jul;29(7):731-8. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2010.02.007. Epub 2010 Apr 9.
6
Acute cellular rejection is a risk factor for bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome independent of post-transplant baseline FEV1.急性细胞排斥是闭塞性细支气管炎综合征的一个风险因素,与移植后基础 FEV1 无关。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2009 Sep;28(9):888-93. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2009.04.022.
7
Development of the new lung allocation system in the United States.美国新肺分配系统的发展。
Am J Transplant. 2006;6(5 Pt 2):1212-27. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2006.01276.x.
8
Relation of pooled logistic regression to time dependent Cox regression analysis: the Framingham Heart Study.汇总逻辑回归与时间依赖性Cox回归分析的关系:弗雷明汉心脏研究
Stat Med. 1990 Dec;9(12):1501-15. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780091214.

细化肺分配评分模型未能提高区分性能。

Refining the Lung Allocation Score Models Fails to Improve Discrimination Performance.

机构信息

Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.

Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.

出版信息

Chest. 2023 Jan;163(1):152-163. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2022.08.2217. Epub 2022 Aug 27.

DOI:10.1016/j.chest.2022.08.2217
PMID:36030838
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9899637/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

As broader geographic sharing is implemented in lung transplant allocation through the Composite Allocation Score (CAS) system, models predicting waitlist and posttransplant (PT) survival will become more important in determining access to organs.

RESEARCH QUESTION

How well do CAS survival models perform, and can discrimination performance be improved with alternative statistical models or machine learning approaches?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients (SRTR) data from 2015-2020 were used to build seven waitlist (WL) and data from 2010-2020 to build similar PT models. These included the (I) current lung allocation score (LAS)/CAS model; (II) re-estimated WL-LAS/CAS model; (III) model II incorporating nonlinear relationships; (IV) random survival forests model; (V) logistic model; (VI) linear discriminant analysis; and (VII) gradient-boosted tree model. Discrimination performance was evaluated at 1, 3, and 6 months on the waiting list and 1, 3, and 5 years PT. Area under the curve (AUC) values were estimated across subgroups.

RESULTS

WL model performance was similar across models with the greatest discrimination in the baseline cohort (AUC 0.93) and declined to 0.87-0.89 for 3-month and 0.84-0.85 for 6-month predictions and further diminished for residual cohorts. Discrimination performance for PT models ranged from AUC 0.58-0.61 and remained stable with increasing forecasting times but was slightly worse for residual cohorts. WL and PT variability in AUC was greatest for individuals with Medicaid insurance.

INTERPRETATION

Use of alternative modeling strategies and contemporary cohorts did not improve performance of models determining access to lung transplant.

摘要

背景

随着通过综合分配评分(CAS)系统在肺移植分配中实施更广泛的地理共享,预测等待名单和移植后(PT)生存的模型在确定器官获取方面将变得更加重要。

研究问题

CAS 生存模型的表现如何,是否可以通过替代统计模型或机器学习方法来提高区分性能?

研究设计和方法

使用 2015-2020 年的科学移植受者登记处(SRTR)数据构建七个等待名单(WL)模型,以及 2010-2020 年的数据构建类似的 PT 模型。这些模型包括:(I)当前肺分配评分(LAS)/CAS 模型;(II)重新估计的 WL-LAS/CAS 模型;(III)纳入非线性关系的模型 II;(IV)随机生存森林模型;(V)逻辑模型;(VI)线性判别分析;和(VII)梯度提升树模型。在等待名单上分别在 1、3 和 6 个月和在 PT 上的 1、3 和 5 年进行了区分性能评估。估计了曲线下面积(AUC)值的跨亚组情况。

结果

WL 模型的性能在各个模型之间相似,在基线队列中具有最大的区分度(AUC 0.93),并在 3 个月和 6 个月的预测中下降到 0.87-0.89,在 1 年和 3 年的预测中下降到 0.84-0.85,对于剩余队列进一步降低。PT 模型的预测范围从 AUC 0.58-0.61,随着预测时间的增加而保持稳定,但对于剩余队列略差。具有医疗补助保险的个体的 WL 和 PT AUC 变异性最大。

解释

使用替代建模策略和当代队列并没有提高确定肺移植机会的模型的性能。