ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2019
Patient-Level Effectiveness Prediction Modeling for Glioblastoma Using Classification Trees.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Construction of Xinjiang metabolic syndrome risk prediction model based on interpretable models.BMC public health · 2022Article
- A Systematic Review of Artificial Intelligence-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems in Prostate Cancer Management.Healthcare technology lettersReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesLittle research has been done in pharmacoepidemiology on the use of machine learning for exploring medicinal treatment effectiveness in oncology. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore the added value of machine learning methods to investigate individual treatment responses for glioblastoma patients treated with temozolomide.
methodsBased on a retrospective observational registry covering 3090 patients with glioblastoma treated with temozolomide, we proposed the use of a two-step iterative exploratory learning process consisting of an initialization phase and a machine learning phase. For initialization, we defined a binary response variable as the target label using one-by-one nearest neighbor propensity score matching. Secondly, a classification tree algorithm was trained and validated for dividing individual patients into treatment response and non-response groups. Theorizing about treatment response was then done by evaluating the tree performance.
resultsThe classification tree model has an area under the curve (AUC) classification performance of 67% corresponding to a sensitivity of 0.69 and a specificity of 0.51. This result in predicting patient-level response was slightly better than the logistic regression model featuring an AUC of 64% (0.63 sensitivity and 0.54 specificity). The tree confirms confounding by age and discovers further age-related stratification with chemotherapy-treatment dependency, both not revealed in preceding clinical studies. The model lacked genetic information confounding treatment response.
conclusionsA classification tree was found to be suitable for understanding patient-level effectiveness for this glioblastoma-temozolomide case because of its high interpretability and capability to deal with covariate interdependencies, essential in a real-world environment. Possible improvements in the model's classification can be achieved by including genetic information and collecting primary data on treatment response. The model can be valuable in clinical practice for predicting personal treatment pathways.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.