Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32446952›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics2020

Developing an Improved Statistical Approach for Survival Estimation in Bone Metastases Management: The Bone Metastases Ensemble Trees for Survival (BMETS) Model.

Sara R Alcorn, Jacob Fiksel, Jean L Wright, Christen R Elledge, Thomas J Smith, Powell Perng, Sarah Saleemi, Todd R McNutt, Theodore L DeWeese, Scott Zeger

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Systematic review of 99 extremity bone malignancy survival prediction models.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Percent of remaining life on palliative radiation treatment: solely a function of fractionation?Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sara R AlcornDepartment of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: salcorn2@jhmi.edu.
Jacob FikselDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD.
Jean L WrightDepartment of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Christen R ElledgeDepartment of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Thomas J SmithDepartment of Oncology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Powell PerngDepartment of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Sarah SaleemiDepartment of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Todd R McNuttDepartment of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Theodore L DeWeeseDepartment of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Scott ZegerDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD.
Johns Hopkins University · USJohns Hopkins Medicine · US

Funding

QAQC Johns Hopkins Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR003098 · NCATS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI FORD, DANIEL ERNEST · 2019 to 2023
$57.7M
EPIDEMIOLOGY AND BIOSTATISTICS OF AGINGT32AG000247 · NIA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Karen J. Bandeen-Roche · 1996 to 2026
$13.2M
Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchKL2TR001077 · NCATS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI FORD, DANIEL ERNEST · 2013 to 2017
$9.2M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR001077NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR003098NIA NIH HHS T32 AG000247
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo determine whether a machine learning approach optimizes survival estimation for patients with symptomatic bone metastases (SBM), we developed the Bone Metastases Ensemble Trees for Survival (BMETS) to predict survival using 27 prognostic covariates. To establish its relative clinical utility, we compared BMETS with 2 simpler Cox regression models used in this setting. METHODS AND MATERIALS: For 492 bone sites in 397 patients evaluated for palliative radiation therapy (RT) for SBM from January 2007 to January 2013, data for 27 clinical variables were collected. These covariates and the primary outcome of time from consultation to death were used to build BMETS using random survival forests. We then performed Cox regressions as per 2 validated models: Chow's 3-item (C-3) and Westhoff's 2-item (W-2) tools. Model performance was assessed using cross-validation procedures and measured by time-dependent area under the curve (tAUC) for all 3 models. For temporal validation, a separate data set comprised of 104 bone sites treated in 85 patients in 2018 was used to estimate tAUC from BMETS.

resultsMedian survival was 6.4 months. Variable importance was greatest for performance status, blood cell counts, recent systemic therapy type, and receipt of concurrent nonbone palliative RT. tAUC at 3, 6, and 12 months was 0.83, 0.81, and 0.81, respectively, suggesting excellent discrimination of BMETS across postconsultation time points. BMETS outperformed simpler models at each time, with respective tAUC at each time of 0.78, 0.76, and 0.74 for the C-3 model and 0.80, 0.78, and 0.77 for the W-2 model. For the temporal validation set, respective tAUC was similarly high at 0.86, 0.82, and 0.78.

conclusionsFor patients with SBM, BMETS improved survival predictions versus simpler traditional models. Model performance was maintained when applied to a temporal validation set. To facilitate clinical use, we developed a web platform for data entry and display of BMETS-predicted survival probabilities.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsLife ExpectancyMachine LearningAnalgesics, OpioidArea Under CurveBlood Cell CountBone NeoplasmsFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateKarnofsky Performance StatusMaleMiddle AgedPalliative CarePelvic BonesPrognosisAnalgesics, OpioidSteroids

Identifiers

PMID32446952
PMCPMC7954525
OpenAlexW3026258004

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.