Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29132615›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of medical informatics2017

Prediction of lung cancer patient survival via supervised machine learning classification techniques.

Chip M Lynch, Behnaz Abdollahi, Joshua D Fuqua, Alexandra R de Carlo, James A Bartholomai, Rayeanne N Balgemann, Victor H van Berkel, Hermann B Frieboes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of medical informatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 96 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
96citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

96 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Advancements and future trends in machine learning for lung cancer: a comprehensive bibliometric analysis.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article

36 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Chip M LynchDepartment of Computer Engineering and Computer Science, University of Louisville, KY, USA.
Behnaz AbdollahiDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Louisville, KY, USA.
Joshua D FuquaDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Louisville, KY, USA.
Alexandra R de CarloDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Louisville, KY, USA.
James A BartholomaiDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Louisville, KY, USA.
Rayeanne N BalgemannDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Louisville, KY, USA.
Victor H van BerkelDepartment of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, University of Louisville, KY, USA.
Hermann B FrieboesDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Louisville, KY, USA; James Graham Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville, KY, USA. Electronic address: hbfrie01@louisville.edu.

Funding

Integrated framework to predict chemotherapy response post lung tumor resectionR15CA203605 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE · PI FRIEBOES, HERMANN · 2016 to 2016
$462k
NCI NIH HHS R15 CA203605
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Outcomes for cancer patients have been previously estimated by applying various machine learning techniques to large datasets such as the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program database. In particular for lung cancer, it is not well understood which types of techniques would yield more predictive information, and which data attributes should be used in order to determine this information. In this study, a number of supervised learning techniques is applied to the SEER database to classify lung cancer patients in terms of survival, including linear regression, Decision Trees, Gradient Boosting Machines (GBM), Support Vector Machines (SVM), and a custom ensemble. Key data attributes in applying these methods include tumor grade, tumor size, gender, age, stage, and number of primaries, with the goal to enable comparison of predictive power between the various methods The prediction is treated like a continuous target, rather than a classification into categories, as a first step towards improving survival prediction. The results show that the predicted values agree with actual values for low to moderate survival times, which constitute the majority of the data. The best performing technique was the custom ensemble with a Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) value of 15.05. The most influential model within the custom ensemble was GBM, while Decision Trees may be inapplicable as it had too few discrete outputs. The results further show that among the five individual models generated, the most accurate was GBM with an RMSE value of 15.32. Although SVM underperformed with an RMSE value of 15.82, statistical analysis singles the SVM as the only model that generated a distinctive output. The results of the models are consistent with a classical Cox proportional hazards model used as a reference technique. We conclude that application of these supervised learning techniques to lung cancer data in the SEER database may be of use to estimate patient survival time with the ultimate goal to inform patient care decisions, and that the performance of these techniques with this particular dataset may be on par with that of classical methods.

Indexed as

Machine LearningSupport Vector MachineDatabases, FactualHumansLung NeoplasmsSurvival RateBiomedical big dataData classificationLung cancerMachine learningSEER databaseSupervised classification

Identifiers

PMID29132615
PMCPMC5726571

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.