ArticleAmerican journal of cancer research2020
Predicting long-term multicategory cause of death in patients with prostate cancer: random forest versus multinomial model.
Article in American journal of cancer research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine Learning in Cardio-Oncology: New Insights from an Emerging Discipline.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- Bayesian risk prediction model for colorectal cancer mortality through integration of clinicopathologic and genomic data.NPJ precision oncology · 2023Article
- Variation in and Factors Associated With US County-Level Cancer Mortality, 2008-2019.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- A polygenic stacking classifier revealed the complicated platelet transcriptomic landscape of adult immune thrombocytopenia.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2022Article
- The Challenges and Opportunities of Translational Pathology.Journal of clinical and translational pathology · 2022Article
- Multimetric feature selection for analyzing multicategory outcomes of colorectal cancer: random forest and multinomial logistic regression models.Laboratory investigation; a journal of technical methods and pathology · 2022Article
- Prediction of Micronucleus Assay Outcome Using In Vivo Activity Data and Molecular Structure Features.Applied biochemistry and biotechnology · 2021Article
- Automated model versus treating physician for predicting survival time of patients with metastatic cancer.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- Predictive modeling of estrogen receptor agonism, antagonism, and binding activities using machine- and deep-learning approaches.Laboratory investigation; a journal of technical methods and pathology · 2021Article
- Performance and efficiency of machine learning algorithms for analyzing rectangular biomedical data.Laboratory investigation; a journal of technical methods and pathology · 2021Article
- Classify multicategory outcome in patients with lung adenocarcinoma using clinical, transcriptomic and clinico-transcriptomic data: machine learning versus multinomial models.American journal of cancer research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The majority of patients with prostate cancer die of non-cancer causes of death (COD). It is thus important to accurately predict multi-category COD in these patients. Random forest (RF), a popular machine learning model, has been shown useful for predicting binary cancer-specific deaths. However, its accuracy for predicting multi-category COD in cancer patients is unclear. We included patients in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-18 cancer registry-program with prostate cancer diagnosed in 2004 (followed-up through 2016). They were randomly divided into training and testing sets with equal sizes. We evaluated prediction accuracies of RF and conventional statistical/multinomial models for 6-category COD by data-encoding types using the 2-fold cross-validation approach. Among 49,864 prostate cancer patients, 29,611 (59.4%) were alive at the end of follow-up, and 5,448 (10.9%) died of cardiovascular disease, 4,607 (9.2%) of prostate cancer, 3,681 (7.4%) of non-prostate cancer, 717 (1.4%) of infection, and 5,800 (11.6%) of other causes. We predicted 6-category COD among these patients with a mean accuracy of 59.1% (n=240, 95% CI, 58.7%-59.4%) in RF models with one-hot encoding, and 50.4% (95% CI, 49.7%-51.0%) in multinomial models. Tumor characteristics, prostate-specific antigen level, and diagnosis confirmation-method were important in RF and multinomial models. In RF models, no statistical differences were found between the accuracies of training versus cross-validation phases, and those of categorical versus one-hot encoding. We here report that RF models can outperform multinomial logistic models (absolute accuracy-difference, 8.7%) in predicting long-term 6-category COD among prostate cancer patients, while pathology diagnosis itself and tumor pathology remain important factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32509383PMC7269775W3033599118What 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.