Machine learning models for 180-day mortality prediction of patients with advanced cancer using patient-reported symptom data

Article indépendant

XU, Cai | SUBBIAH, Ishwaria M. | LU, Sheng-Chieh | PFOB, André | SIDEY-GIBBONS, Chris

Purpose: The objective of the current study was to develop and test the performances of different ML algorithms which were trained using patient-reported symptom severity data to predict mortality within 180 days for patients with advanced cancer. Methods: We randomly selected 630 of 689 patients with advanced cancer at our institution who completed symptom PRO measures as part of routine care between 2009 and 2020. Using clinical, demographic, and PRO data, we trained and tested four ML algorithms: generalized regression with elastic net regularization (GLM), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) trees, support vector machines (SVM), and a single hidden layer neural network (NNET). We assessed the performance of algorithms individually as well as part of an unweighted voting ensemble on the hold-out testing sample. Performance was assessed using area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Results: The starting cohort of 630 patients was randomly partitioned into training (n = 504) and testing (n = 126) samples. Of the four ML models, the XGBoost algorithm demonstrated the best performance for 180-day mortality prediction in testing data (AUROC = 0.69, sensitivity = 0.68, specificity = 0.62, PPV = 0.66, NPV = 0.64). Ensemble of all algorithms performed worst (AUROC = 0.65, sensitivity = 0.65, specificity = 0.62, PPV = 0.65, NPV = 0.62). Of individual PRO symptoms, shortness of breath emerged as the variable of highest impact on the XGBoost 180-mortality prediction (1-AUROC = 0.30). Conclusion: Our findings support ML models driven by patient-reported symptom severity as accurate predictors of short-term mortality in patients with advanced cancer, highlighting the opportunity to integrate these models prospectively into future studies of goal-concordant care.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-022-03284-y

Voir la revue «Quality of life research, 32»

Autres numéros de la revue «Quality of life research»

• Description
• Sujet/Public
• Outil
• Outil d'anticipation
• Gestion