Association Between Comorbidity Clusters and Mortality in Patients With Cancer: Predictive Modeling Using Machine Learning Approaches of Data From the United States and Hong Kong
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Patients with cancer and cancer survivors often experience multiple chronic health conditions, which can impact symptom burden and treatment outcomes. Despite the high prevalence of multimorbidity, research on cancer prognosis has predominantly focused on cancers in isolation. There is growing interest in machine learning techniques for cancer studies. However, these methods have not been applied in the context of supportive care for patients with cancer who have multimorbidity. Furthermore, few studies have investigated the associations between comorbidity clusters and mortality outcomes. Objective: This study investigated comorbidity clusters among patients with cancer using machine learning and examined their associations with mortality outcomes in two large representative samples from the United States and Hong Kong. Methods: This study used data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) and the Hospital Authority Data Collaboration Laboratory (HADCL). Participants aged ≥20 years with a history of cancer were included. The study used a two-step framework to identify clusters of comorbidities in NHANES. In the first step, we used four machine learning techniques, including the Bernoulli mixture model and partition-based methods, to cluster the comorbidities. In the second step, domain experts reviewed and ranked the identified clusters to ensure clinical relevance. The clusters that had the highest average rank were selected for further analysis. The associations between comorbidity clusters and mortality outcomes were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models. We conducted an external validation to evaluate the generalizability of the clusters identified in the NHANES cohort and their associations with mortality using HADCL. The same number of clusters was replicated based on the distinctive patterns and distribution of comorbidities observed within each cluster. Results: The study included 4390 participants in NHANES and 12,484 participants in HADCL. Four comorbidity clusters were identified: low comorbidity, metabolic, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and respiratory. In NHANES, participants in the respiratory cluster had the highest risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.62, 95% CI 1.26-2.08; P<.001), followed by the CVD cluster (aHR 1.50, 95% CI 1.26-1.80; P<.001) compared to the low comorbidity cluster. The 3 clusters were associated with higher risks of CVD-related mortality (aHR 1.48-3.05, 95% CI 1.14-4.07; P<.003). The effects of comorbidity clusters on mortality were modified by income-to-poverty ratio (P for interaction=.04), diet quality (P for interaction=.02), and cancer prognosis (P for interaction=.005). In the HADCL (validation) cohort, participants in the respiratory and CVD clusters had a higher risk of all-cause mortality. Conclusions: High comorbidity burden clusters showed increased all-cause and CVD-related mortality in patients with cancer. These findings highlight the significance of considering comorbidity burden in cancer care. Machine learning approaches can provide valuable insights into complex multimorbidity profiles. Further research is needed to deepen understanding of the relationships between multimorbidity and cancer-specific outcomes.
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 | 0,005 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 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 ».