Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32492934›Full record

ArticleCancers2020

Improving Multi-Tumor Biomarker Health Check-up Tests with Machine Learning Algorithms.

Hsin-Yao Wang, Chun-Hsien Chen, Steve Shi, Chia-Ru Chung, Ying-Hao Wen, Min-Hsien Wu, Michael S Lebowitz, Jiming Zhou, Jang-Jih Lu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Hsin-Yao WangDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taoyuan City 33305, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0001-5581-6793
Chun-Hsien ChenDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taoyuan City 33305, Taiwan.
Steve Shi20/20 GeneSystems, Inc, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
Chia-Ru ChungDepartment of Computer Science and Information Engineering, National Central University, Taoyuan City 32001, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-4548-7620
Ying-Hao WenDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taoyuan City 33305, Taiwan.
Min-Hsien WuGraduate Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan City 33301, Taiwan.
Michael S Lebowitz20/20 GeneSystems, Inc, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
Jiming Zhou20/20 GeneSystems, Inc, Rockville, MD 20850, USA.
Jang-Jih LuDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taoyuan City 33305, Taiwan.
Chang Gung University · TW20/20 GeneSystem (United States) · USChang Gung Memorial Hospital · TWNational Central University · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTumor markers are used to screen tens of millions of individuals worldwide at annual health check-ups, especially in East Asia. Machine learning (ML)-based algorithms that improve the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of these tests can have substantial impact leading to the early diagnosis of cancer.

methodsML-based algorithms, including a cancer screening algorithm and a secondary organ of origin algorithm, were developed and validated using a large real world dataset (RWD) from asymptomatic individuals undergoing routine cancer screening at a Taiwanese medical center between May 2001 and April 2015. External validation was performed using data from the same period from a separate medical center. The data set included tumor marker values, age, and gender from 27,938 individuals, including 342 subsequently confirmed cancer cases.

resultsSeparate gender-specific cancer screening algorithms were developed. For men, a logistic regression-based algorithm outperformed single-marker and other ML-based algorithms, with a mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.7654 in internal and 0.8736 in external cross validation. For women, a random forest-based algorithm attained a mean AUROC of 0.6665 in internal and 0.6938 in external cross validation. The median time to cancer diagnosis (TTD) in men was 451.5, 204.5, and 28 days for the mild, moderate, and high-risk groups, respectively; for women, the median TTD was 229, 132, and 125 days for the mild, moderate, and high-risk groups. A second algorithm was developed to predict the most likely affected organ systems for at-risk individuals. The algorithm yielded 0.8120 sensitivity and 0.6490 specificity for men, and 0.8170 sensitivity and 0.6750 specificity for women.

conclusionsML-derived algorithms, trained and validated by using a RWD, can significantly improve tumor marker-based screening for multiple types of early stage cancers, suggest the tissue of origin, and provide guidance for patient follow-up.

Indexed as

Cancer screeningHealth check-upMachine learningTumor marker

Identifiers

PMID32492934
PMCPMC7352838
OpenAlexW3028614945

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.