Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36909607›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2024

Emulator-based Bayesian calibration of the CISNET colorectal cancer models.

Carlos Pineda-Antunez, Claudia Seguin, Luuk A van Duuren, Amy B Knudsen, Barak Davidi, Pedro Nascimento de Lima, Carolyn Rutter, Karen M Kuntz, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Nicholson Collier and 2 more

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Carlos Pineda-AntunezThe Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-8352-7080
Claudia SeguinInstitute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1076-5563
Luuk A van DuurenDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC Medical Center Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6286-8062
Amy B KnudsenInstitute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.
Barak DavidiInstitute for Technology Assessment, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4802-0962
Pedro Nascimento de LimaRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9057-198X
Carolyn RutterFred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Biostatistics Program, Public Health Sciences Division, Seattle WA.ORCID 0000-0002-4396-8594
Karen M KuntzDivision of Health Policy & Management, University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Minneapolis, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6335-7590
Iris Lansdorp-VogelaarDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC Medical Center Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9438-2753
Nicholson CollierDecision and Infrastructure Sciences Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2376-4156
Jonathan OzikDecision and Infrastructure Sciences Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-3495-6735
Fernando Alarid-EscuderoDepartment of Health Policy, School of Medicine, Stanford University, CA, US.ORCID 0000-0001-5076-1172

Funding

Comparative Modeling of Effective Policies for Colorectal Cancer ControlU01CA253913 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI RUTTER, CAROLYN M, ZAUBER, ANN GRAHAM · 2020 to 2025
$6.5M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA253913
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To calibrate Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) 's SimCRC, MISCAN-Colon, and CRC-SPIN simulation models of the natural history colorectal cancer (CRC) with an emulator-based Bayesian algorithm and internally validate the model-predicted outcomes to calibration targets. Methods: We used Latin hypercube sampling to sample up to 50,000 parameter sets for each CISNET-CRC model and generated the corresponding outputs. We trained multilayer perceptron artificial neural networks (ANN) as emulators using the input and output samples for each CISNET-CRC model. We selected ANN structures with corresponding hyperparameters (i.e., number of hidden layers, nodes, activation functions, epochs, and optimizer) that minimize the predicted mean square error on the validation sample. We implemented the ANN emulators in a probabilistic programming language and calibrated the input parameters with Hamiltonian Monte Carlo-based algorithms to obtain the joint posterior distributions of the CISNET-CRC models' parameters. We internally validated each calibrated emulator by comparing the model-predicted posterior outputs against the calibration targets. Results: The optimal ANN for SimCRC had four hidden layers and 360 hidden nodes, MISCAN-Colon had 4 hidden layers and 114 hidden nodes, and CRC-SPIN had one hidden layer and 140 hidden nodes. The total time for training and calibrating the emulators was 7.3, 4.0, and 0.66 hours for SimCRC, MISCAN-Colon, and CRC-SPIN, respectively. The mean of the model-predicted outputs fell within the 95% confidence intervals of the calibration targets in 98 of 110 for SimCRC, 65 of 93 for MISCAN, and 31 of 41 targets for CRC-SPIN. Conclusions: Using ANN emulators is a practical solution to reduce the computational burden and complexity for Bayesian calibration of individual-level simulation models used for policy analysis, like the CISNET CRC models. In this work, we present a step-by-step guide to constructing emulators for calibrating three realistic CRC individual-level models using a Bayesian approach.

Indexed as

artificial neural networksBayesian calibrationcolorectal cancer modelemulatormachine learning

Identifiers

PMID36909607
PMCPMC10002763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.