Gao K, Wang Y, Cao H, Jia J
Department of Surgical Oncology, First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College, Bengbu 233000, China.
Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2023 Jun 20;43(6):952-963. doi: 10.12122/j.issn.1673-4254.2023.06.10.
To compare the performance of machine learning models and traditional Cox regression model in predicting postoperative outcomes of patients with esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma (AEG).
This study was conducted among 203 AEG patients with complete clinical and follow-up data, who were treated in our hospital between September, 2015 and October, 2020. The clinicopathological data of the patients were processed for analysis using R language package and divided into training and validation datasets at the ratio of 3:1. The Cox proportional hazards regression model and 4 machine learning models were constructed for analyzing the datasets. ROC curves, calibration curves and clinical decision curves (DCA) were plotted. Internal validation of the machine learning models was performed to assess their predictive efficacy. The predictive performance of each model was evaluated by calculating the area under the curve (AUC), and the model fitting was assessed using the calibration curve.
For predicting 3-year survival based on the validation dataset, the AUC was 0.870 for Cox proportional hazard regression model, 0.901 for eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), 0.791 for random forest, 0.832 for support vector machine, and 0.725 for multilayer perceptron; For predicting 5-year survival, the AUCs of these models were 0.915, 0.916, 0.758, 0.905, and 0.737, respectively. For internal validation, the AUCs of the 4 machine learning models decreased in the order of XGBoost (0.818), random forest (0.758), support vector machine (0.0.804), and multilayer perceptron (0.745).
The machine learning models show better predictive efficacy for survival outcomes of patients with AEG than Cox proportional hazard regression model, especially when proportional odds assumption or linear regression models are not applicable. XGBoost models have better performance than the other machine learning models, and the multi-layer perception model may have poor fitting results for a limited data volume.
比较机器学习模型和传统Cox回归模型预测食管胃交界腺癌(AEG)患者术后结局的性能。
本研究纳入了203例有完整临床和随访数据的AEG患者,这些患者于2015年9月至2020年10月在我院接受治疗。使用R语言包对患者的临床病理数据进行处理分析,并按3:1的比例分为训练集和验证集。构建Cox比例风险回归模型和4种机器学习模型来分析数据集。绘制ROC曲线、校准曲线和临床决策曲线(DCA)。对机器学习模型进行内部验证以评估其预测效能。通过计算曲线下面积(AUC)评估每个模型的预测性能,并使用校准曲线评估模型拟合情况。
基于验证集预测3年生存率时,Cox比例风险回归模型的AUC为0.870,极端梯度提升(XGBoost)为0.901,随机森林为0.791,支持向量机为0.832,多层感知器为0.725;预测5年生存率时,这些模型的AUC分别为0.915、0.916、0.758、0.905和0.737。对于内部验证,4种机器学习模型的AUC按以下顺序降低:XGBoost(0.818)、随机森林(0.758)、支持向量机(0.804)和多层感知器(0.745)。
机器学习模型在预测AEG患者生存结局方面比Cox比例风险回归模型具有更好的预测效能,尤其是在比例优势假设或线性回归模型不适用时。XGBoost模型的性能优于其他机器学习模型,而多层感知模型对于有限的数据量可能拟合效果较差。