A Deep Learning–Enabled Workflow to Estimate Real-World Progression-Free Survival in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer: Study Using Deidentified Electronic Health Records
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Progression-free survival (PFS) is a crucial endpoint in cancer drug research. The clinician-confirmed cancer progression, namely real-world PFS (rwPFS) in unstructured text (i.e. clinical notes) has been shown to serve as a reasonable surrogate for real-world indicators in ascertaining progression endpoints. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors(RECIST) is traditionally used in clinical trials using serial imaging evaluations, which is not practical when working with real-world data. Manual abstraction of clinical progression from unstructured notes continues to be the gold standard. However, this process is a resource-intensive and time-consuming process. Natural Language processing(NLP), a subdomain of machine learning, has shown promise in accelerating the extraction of tumor progression from real world data in recent years. OBJECTIVE: We aim to configure a pre-trained, general-purpose healthcare NLP framework to transform free-text clinical notes and radiology reports into structured progression events for studying rwPFS on metastatic breast cancer (mBC) cohorts. METHODS: This study developed and validated a novel semi-automated workflow to estimate rwPFS in patients with mBC using de-identified EHR data from the nference nSights platform. The developed workflow was validated in a cohort of 316 patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2(HER2)2-negative mBC, who were started on Palbociclib and Letrozole combination therapy between January 2015 and December 2021. Ground-truth datasets were curated to evaluate the workflow's performance at both the sentence and patient levels. NLP-captured progression or a change in therapy line were considered outcome events, while death, loss to follow-up, and end of study period were considered censoring events for rwPFS computation. Peak reduction and cumulative decline in Patient-Health-Questoinnaire-8(PHQ-8) scores were analyzed in the progressed and non-progressed patient subgroups. RESULTS: The configured clinical NLP engine achieved a sentence-level progression capture accuracy of 98.2%. At the patient level, initial progression was captured within ±30 days with 88% accuracy. The median real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) for the study cohort(N=316) was 20 months (95% CI: 18.0-25.0). In a validation subset(N=100), rwPFS determined by manual curation was 25 months (95% CI: 15-35 months), closely aligning with the computational workflow's 22 months (95% CI: 15-35 months). A sub-analysis revealed rwPFS estimates of 30 months (95% CI: 24.0-39.0) from radiology reports and 23 months (95% CI: 19.0-28.0) from clinical notes, highlighting the importance of integrating multiple note sources. External validation also demonstrated high accuracy (92.5%-sentence-level; 90.2%-patient-level). Sensitivity analysis revealed stable rwPFS estimates across varying levels of missing source data and event definitions. Peak reduction and cumulative decline in PHQ-8 scores during the study period highlighted significant associations between patient-reported outcomes and disease progression. CONCLUSIONS: This workflow enables rapid and reliable determination of rwPFS in mBC patients receiving combination therapy. Further validation across more diverse external datasets and other cancer types is needed to ensure broader applicability and generalizability.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».