Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36481644›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Predicting 180-day mortality for women with ovarian cancer using machine learning and patient-reported outcome data.

Chris J Sidey-Gibbons, Charlotte Sun, Amy Schneider, Sheng-Chieh Lu, Karen Lu, Alexi Wright, Larissa Meyer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chris J Sidey-GibbonsSection of Patient-Centered Analytics, Department of Symptom Research, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA. cgibbons@Mdanderson.org.
Charlotte SunDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA.
Amy SchneiderDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA.
Sheng-Chieh LuSection of Patient-Centered Analytics, Department of Symptom Research, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA.
Karen LuDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA.
Alexi WrightDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, USA.
Larissa MeyerDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USHarvard University · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Fabien Delerue · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
Health Services Career Development: Improving Medical Decisions in Ovarian CancerK07CA201013 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI MEYER, LARISSA ALEJANDRA · 2016 to 2020
$853k
NCI NIH HHS K07 CA201013NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Contrary to national guidelines, women with ovarian cancer often receive treatment at the end of life, potentially due to the difficulty in accurately estimating prognosis. We trained machine learning algorithms to guide prognosis by predicting 180-day mortality for women with ovarian cancer using patient-reported outcomes (PRO) data. We collected data from a single academic cancer institution in the United States. Women completed biopsychosocial PRO measures every 90 days. We randomly partitioned our dataset into training and testing samples. We used synthetic minority oversampling to reduce class imbalance in the training dataset. We fitted training data to six machine learning algorithms and combined their classifications on the testing dataset into an unweighted voting ensemble. We assessed each algorithm's accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) using testing data. We recruited 245 patients who completed 1319 PRO assessments. The final voting ensemble produced state-of-the-art results on the task of predicting 180-day mortality for ovarian cancer paitents (Accuracy = 0.79, Sensitivity = 0.71, Specificity = 0.80, AUROC = 0.76). The algorithm correctly identified 25 of the 35 women in the testing dataset who died within 180 days of assessment. Machine learning algorithms trained using PRO data offer encouraging performance in predicting whether a woman with ovarian cancer will die within 180 days. This model could be used to drive data-driven end-of-life care and address current shortcomings in care delivery. Our model demonstrates the potential of biopsychosocial PROM information to make substantial contributions to oncology prediction modeling. This model could inform clinical decision-making Future research is needed to validate these findings in a larger, more diverse sample.

Indexed as

Ovarian NeoplasmsSchoolsFemaleHumansMachine LearningPatient Reported Outcome Measures

Identifiers

PMID36481644
PMCPMC9732183
OpenAlexW4311086035

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.