Department of Radiation Oncology (V.S., B.G., L.H.V., L.M., K.A.W., M.A.N., R.H., A.S.R.M., C.D.F., A.C.M), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Department of Radiation Oncology (V.S., B.G., L.H.V., L.M., K.A.W., M.A.N., R.H., A.S.R.M., C.D.F., A.C.M), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA; Department of Medical Education (B.G.), Paul L. Foster School of Medicine, Texas Tech Health Sciences Center, El Paso, TX, USA.
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2024 Dec;68(6):e462-e490. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2024.07.025. Epub 2024 Aug 3.
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Pain is a challenging multifaceted symptom reported by most cancer patients. This systematic review aims to explore applications of artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML) in predicting pain-related outcomes and pain management in cancer.
A comprehensive search of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science databases was conducted using terms: "Cancer," "Pain," "Pain Management," "Analgesics," "Artificial Intelligence," "Machine Learning," and "Neural Networks" published up to September 7, 2023. AI/ML models, their validation and performance were summarized. Quality assessment was conducted using PROBAST risk-of-bias andadherence to TRIPOD guidelines.
Forty four studies from 2006 to 2023 were included. Nineteen studies used AI/ML for classifying pain after cancer therapy [median AUC 0.80 (range 0.76-0.94)]. Eighteen studies focused on cancer pain research [median AUC 0.86 (range 0.50-0.99)], and 7 focused on applying AI/ML for cancer pain management, [median AUC 0.71 (range 0.47-0.89)]. Median AUC (0.77) of models across all studies. Random forest models demonstrated the highest performance (median AUC 0.81), lasso models had the highest median sensitivity (1), while Support Vector Machine had the highest median specificity (0.74). Overall adherence to TRIPOD guidelines was 70.7%. Overall, high risk-of-bias (77.3%), lack of external validation (14%) and clinical application (23%) was detected. Reporting of model calibration was also missing (5%).
Implementation of AI/ML tools promises significant advances in the classification, risk stratification, and management decisions for cancer pain. Further research focusing on quality improvement, model calibration, rigorous external clinical validation in real healthcare settings is imperative for ensuring its practical and reliable application in clinical practice.
背景/目的:疼痛是大多数癌症患者报告的一种具有挑战性的多方面症状。本系统评价旨在探讨人工智能/机器学习(AI/ML)在预测癌症相关疼痛结局和疼痛管理中的应用。
使用术语“癌症”、“疼痛”、“疼痛管理”、“镇痛药”、“人工智能”、“机器学习”和“神经网络”,对 Ovid MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 Web of Science 数据库进行全面检索,检索时间截至 2023 年 9 月 7 日。总结 AI/ML 模型及其验证和性能。使用 PROBAST 偏倚风险和 TRIPOD 指南的依从性对质量进行评估。
纳入了 2006 年至 2023 年的 44 项研究。19 项研究使用 AI/ML 对癌症治疗后疼痛进行分类[中位数 AUC 0.80(范围 0.76-0.94)]。18 项研究专注于癌症疼痛研究[中位数 AUC 0.86(范围 0.50-0.99)],7 项研究专注于应用 AI/ML 进行癌症疼痛管理[中位数 AUC 0.71(范围 0.47-0.89)]。所有研究的模型中位数 AUC 为 0.77。随机森林模型表现出最高的性能(中位数 AUC 0.81),套索模型具有最高的中位数敏感性(1),而支持向量机具有最高的中位数特异性(0.74)。总体上,TRIPOD 指南的依从性为 70.7%。总体而言,发现存在高偏倚风险(77.3%)、缺乏外部验证(14%)和临床应用(23%)的问题。模型校准的报告也缺失(5%)。
实施 AI/ML 工具有望在癌症疼痛的分类、风险分层和管理决策方面取得重大进展。进一步的研究需要注重提高质量、对模型进行严格的外部临床验证,并在真实的医疗保健环境中进行,这对于确保其在临床实践中的实际和可靠应用至关重要。