• 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

基于七个临床变量构建前列腺活检中显著前列腺癌检测的预测模型:机器学习是否优于逻辑回归?

Developing a Predictive Model for Significant Prostate Cancer Detection in Prostatic Biopsies from Seven Clinical Variables: Is Machine Learning Superior to Logistic Regression?

作者信息

Morote Juan, Miró Berta, Hernando Patricia, Paesano Nahuel, Picola Natàlia, Muñoz-Rodriguez Jesús, Ruiz-Plazas Xavier, Muñoz-Rivero Marta V, Celma Ana, García-de Manuel Gemma, Servian Pol, Abascal José M, Trilla Enrique, Méndez Olga

机构信息

Department of Urology, Vall Hebron University Hospital, 08035 Barcelona, Spain.

Department of Surgery, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Spain.

出版信息

Cancers (Basel). 2025 Mar 25;17(7):1101. doi: 10.3390/cancers17071101.

DOI:10.3390/cancers17071101
PMID:40227611
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11987821/
Abstract

: This study compares machine learning (ML) and logistic regression (LR) algorithms in developing a predictive model for sPCa using the seven predictive variables from the Barcelona (BCN-MRI) predictive model. : A cohort of 5005 men suspected of having PCa who underwent MRI and targeted and/or systematic biopsies was used for training, testing, and validation. A feedforward neural network (FNN)-based SimpleNet model (GMV) and a logistic regression-based model (BCN) were developed. The models were evaluated for discrimination ability, precision-recall, net benefit, and clinical utility. Both models demonstrated strong predictive performance. : The GMV model achieved an area under the curve of 0.88 in training and 0.85 in test cohorts (95% CI: 0.83-0.90), while the BCN model reached 0.85 and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.82-0.87), respectively ( > 0.05). The GMV model exhibited higher recall, making it more suitable for clinical scenarios prioritizing sensitivity, whereas the BCN model demonstrated higher precision and specificity, optimizing the reduction of unnecessary biopsies. Both models provided similar clinical benefit over biopsying all men, reducing unnecessary procedures by 27.5-29% and 27-27.5% of prostate biopsies at 95% sensitivity, respectively ( > 0.05). : Our findings suggest that both ML and LR models offer high accuracy in sPCa detection, with ML exhibiting superior recall and LR optimizing specificity. These results highlight the need for model selection based on clinical priorities.

摘要

本研究比较了机器学习(ML)算法和逻辑回归(LR)算法,利用巴塞罗那(BCN-MRI)预测模型中的七个预测变量,开发用于预测前列腺癌(sPCa)的模型。选取了5005名疑似患有前列腺癌且接受了MRI检查以及靶向和/或系统活检的男性队列用于训练、测试和验证。开发了基于前馈神经网络(FNN)的SimpleNet模型(GMV)和基于逻辑回归的模型(BCN)。对这些模型的判别能力、精确召回率、净效益和临床实用性进行了评估。两个模型均表现出强大的预测性能。GMV模型在训练队列中的曲线下面积为0.88,在测试队列中为0.85(95%置信区间:0.83 - 0.90),而BCN模型分别达到0.85和0.84(95%置信区间:0.82 - 0.87)(P>0.05)。GMV模型表现出更高的召回率,使其更适合优先考虑敏感性的临床场景,而BCN模型表现出更高的精确率和特异性,优化了不必要活检的减少。在95%敏感性时,与对所有男性进行活检相比,两个模型均提供了相似的临床效益,分别减少了27.5 - 29%和27 - 27.5%的前列腺活检不必要操作(P>0.05)。我们的研究结果表明,ML和LR模型在sPCa检测中均具有较高的准确性,ML表现出更高的召回率,而LR优化了特异性。这些结果凸显了根据临床优先级进行模型选择的必要性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/9002d62f03e3/cancers-17-01101-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/21bb48164276/cancers-17-01101-g0A1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/e804992ecb15/cancers-17-01101-g0A2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/b20e856708f0/cancers-17-01101-g0A3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/afe932144efe/cancers-17-01101-g0A4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/32770f9cc970/cancers-17-01101-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/e8759026545f/cancers-17-01101-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/fd1663a72836/cancers-17-01101-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/9002d62f03e3/cancers-17-01101-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/21bb48164276/cancers-17-01101-g0A1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/e804992ecb15/cancers-17-01101-g0A2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/b20e856708f0/cancers-17-01101-g0A3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/afe932144efe/cancers-17-01101-g0A4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/32770f9cc970/cancers-17-01101-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/e8759026545f/cancers-17-01101-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/fd1663a72836/cancers-17-01101-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bd07/11987821/9002d62f03e3/cancers-17-01101-g004.jpg

相似文献

1
Developing a Predictive Model for Significant Prostate Cancer Detection in Prostatic Biopsies from Seven Clinical Variables: Is Machine Learning Superior to Logistic Regression?基于七个临床变量构建前列腺活检中显著前列腺癌检测的预测模型:机器学习是否优于逻辑回归?
Cancers (Basel). 2025 Mar 25;17(7):1101. doi: 10.3390/cancers17071101.
2
Validation of the Barcelona Magnetic Resonance Imaging Predictive Model for Significant Prostate Cancer Detection in Men Undergoing Mapping per 0.5 Mm-Core Targeted Biopsies of Suspicious Lesions and Perilesional Areas.对巴塞罗那磁共振成像预测模型的验证,该模型用于在对可疑病变和病变周围区域进行每0.5毫米核心靶向活检的男性中检测显著前列腺癌。
Cancers (Basel). 2025 Jan 31;17(3):473. doi: 10.3390/cancers17030473.
3
Development and head-to-head comparison of machine-learning models to identify patients requiring prostate biopsy.开发并对头对头比较机器学习模型,以识别需要进行前列腺活检的患者。
BMC Urol. 2021 May 16;21(1):80. doi: 10.1186/s12894-021-00849-w.
4
Predicting Positive Repeat Prostate Biopsy Outcomes: Comparison of Machine Learning Approaches to Identify Key Parameters and Optimal Algorithms.预测前列腺重复活检阳性结果:比较机器学习方法以识别关键参数和优化算法
Arch Esp Urol. 2023 Sep;76(7):494-503. doi: 10.56434/j.arch.esp.urol.20237607.61.
5
Comparison of Rotterdam and Barcelona Magnetic Resonance Imaging Risk Calculators for Predicting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.用于预测临床显著前列腺癌的鹿特丹和巴塞罗那磁共振成像风险计算器的比较
Eur Urol Open Sci. 2023 May 22;53:46-54. doi: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.03.013. eCollection 2023 Jul.
6
Optimizing prostate biopsy decision-making for patients with Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) ≥3 lesions: novel magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based nomograms.优化前列腺影像报告和数据系统(PI-RADS)≥3级病变患者的前列腺活检决策:基于磁共振成像(MRI)的新型列线图
Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2024 Dec 5;14(12):8196-8210. doi: 10.21037/qims-24-1072. Epub 2024 Oct 11.
7
External validation of the barcelona magnetic resonance imaging predictive model for detecting significant prostate cancer including men receiving 5-alpha reductase inhibitors.对包括接受 5α-还原酶抑制剂治疗的男性在内的患者进行前列腺癌显著程度检测的巴塞罗那磁共振成像预测模型的外部验证。
World J Urol. 2024 Jul 10;42(1):393. doi: 10.1007/s00345-024-05092-0.
8
Constructing and Validating Models for Predicting Gleason Grade Group Upgrading following Radical Prostatectomy in Localized Prostate Cancer: A Comparison between Machine Learning Algorithms and Conventional Logistic Regression.构建和验证预测局限性前列腺癌根治性前列腺切除术后Gleason分级组升级的模型:机器学习算法与传统逻辑回归的比较
Oncology. 2025 Jan 24:1-11. doi: 10.1159/000543492.
9
Enhancement of prostate cancer diagnosis by machine learning techniques: an algorithm development and validation study.基于机器学习技术的前列腺癌诊断增强:一项算法研发与验证研究。
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2022 Apr;25(4):672-676. doi: 10.1038/s41391-021-00429-x. Epub 2021 Jul 15.
10
Optimizing unsupervised feature engineering and classification pipelines for differentiated thyroid cancer recurrence prediction.优化用于分化型甲状腺癌复发预测的无监督特征工程和分类管道
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2025 May 13;25(1):182. doi: 10.1186/s12911-025-03018-3.

本文引用的文献

1
Advances in Prostate Cancer Biomarkers and Probes.前列腺癌生物标志物与探针的进展
Cyborg Bionic Syst. 2024 Jun 27;5:0129. doi: 10.34133/cbsystems.0129. eCollection 2024.
2
MRI-based Deep Learning Algorithm for Assisting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection: A Bicenter Prospective Study.基于磁共振成像的深度学习算法辅助临床显著性前列腺癌检测:一项双中心前瞻性研究
Radiology. 2025 Mar;314(3):e232788. doi: 10.1148/radiol.232788.
3
Comparison of logistic regression and machine learning methods for predicting depression risks among disabled elderly individuals: results from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study.
逻辑回归与机器学习方法在预测残疾老年人抑郁风险中的比较:基于中国健康与养老追踪调查的结果
BMC Psychiatry. 2025 Feb 14;25(1):128. doi: 10.1186/s12888-025-06577-x.
4
Comparative Performance of Machine Learning Models in Reducing Unnecessary Targeted Prostate Biopsies.机器学习模型在减少不必要的靶向前列腺活检中的比较性能
Eur Urol Oncol. 2025 Feb 8. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2025.01.005.
5
Relative Fat Mass and Physical Indices as Predictors of Gallstone Formation: Insights From Machine Learning and Logistic Regression.相对脂肪量和身体指标作为胆结石形成的预测因素:来自机器学习和逻辑回归的见解
Int J Gen Med. 2025 Jan 31;18:509-527. doi: 10.2147/IJGM.S507013. eCollection 2025.
6
Constructing and Validating Models for Predicting Gleason Grade Group Upgrading following Radical Prostatectomy in Localized Prostate Cancer: A Comparison between Machine Learning Algorithms and Conventional Logistic Regression.构建和验证预测局限性前列腺癌根治性前列腺切除术后Gleason分级组升级的模型:机器学习算法与传统逻辑回归的比较
Oncology. 2025 Jan 24:1-11. doi: 10.1159/000543492.
7
Comparison between traditional logistic regression and machine learning for predicting mortality in adult sepsis patients.传统逻辑回归与机器学习在预测成年脓毒症患者死亡率方面的比较。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2025 Jan 6;11:1496869. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1496869. eCollection 2024.
8
Prediction of Neurodevelopmental Outcomes in Very Preterm Infants: Comparing Machine Learning Methods to Logistic Regression.极早产儿神经发育结局的预测:机器学习方法与逻辑回归的比较
Children (Basel). 2024 Dec 12;11(12):1512. doi: 10.3390/children11121512.
9
An Automatic Deep-Radiomics Framework for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Stratification in Patients with Serum Prostate-Specific Antigen of 4.0-10.0 ng/mL: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.血清前列腺特异性抗原为4.0 - 10.0 ng/mL的前列腺癌患者诊断与分层的自动深度放射组学框架:一项多中心回顾性研究
Acad Radiol. 2025 May;32(5):2709-2722. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2024.12.012. Epub 2025 Jan 2.
10
The relative data hungriness of unpenalized and penalized logistic regression and ensemble-based machine learning methods: the case of calibration.无惩罚和有惩罚逻辑回归以及基于集成的机器学习方法的相对数据需求量:校准的案例
Diagn Progn Res. 2024 Nov 5;8(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s41512-024-00179-z.