Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32993745›Full record

ArticleJournal of ovarian research2020

Predicting complete cytoreduction for advanced ovarian cancer patients using nearest-neighbor models.

Alexandros Laios, Alexandros Gryparis, Diederick DeJong, Richard Hutson, Georgios Theophilou, Chris Leach

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ovarian research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Alexandros LaiosDepartment of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK. alxlaios2000@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4870-7393
Alexandros GryparisUnit of Endocrinology, Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolism, Aretaion Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens School of Medicine, Athens, Greece.
Diederick DeJongDepartment of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK.
Richard HutsonDepartment of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK.
Georgios TheophilouDepartment of Gynaecological Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK.
Chris LeachSchool of Human & Health Sciences, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, HD1 3DH, UK.
St James's University Hospital · GBNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GRUniversity of Huddersfield · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe foundation of modern ovarian cancer care is cytoreductive surgery to remove all macroscopic disease (R0). Identification of R0 resection patients may help individualise treatment. Machine learning and AI have been shown to be effective systems for classification and prediction. For a disease as heterogenous as ovarian cancer, they could potentially outperform conventional predictive algorithms for routine clinical use. We investigated the performance of an AI system, the k-nearest neighbor (k-NN) classifier, to predict R0, comparing it with logistic regression. Patients diagnosed with advanced stage, high grade serous ovarian, tubal and primary peritoneal cancer, undergoing surgical cytoreduction from 2015 to 2019, was selected from the ovarian database. Performance variables included age, BMI, Charlson Comorbidity Index, timing of surgery, surgical complexity and disease score. The k-NN algorithm classified R0 vs non-R0 patients using 3-20 nearest neighbors. Prediction accuracy was estimated as percentage of observations in the training set correctly classified.

results154 patients were identified, with mean age of 64.4 + 10.5 yrs., BMI of 27.2 + 5.8 and mean SCS of 3 + 1 (1-8). Complete and optimal cytoreduction was achieved in 62 and 88% patients. The mean predictive accuracy was 66%. R0 resection prediction of true negatives was as high as 90% using k = 20 neighbors.

conclusionsThe k-NN algorithm is a promising and versatile tool for R0 resection prediction. It slightly outperforms logistic regression and is expected to improve accuracy with data expansion.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceCytoreduction Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansMachine LearningMiddle AgedOvarian NeoplasmsArtificial intelligenceCytoreductionMachine learningOvarian CancerPredictive factors

Identifiers

PMID32993745
PMCPMC7526140
OpenAlexW3090706813

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.