Datamining approaches for modeling tumor control probability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tumor control probability (TCP) to radiotherapy is determined by complex interactions between tumor biology, tumor microenvironment, radiation dosimetry, and patient-related variables. The complexity of these heterogeneous variable interactions constitutes a challenge for building predictive models for routine clinical practice. We describe a datamining framework that can unravel the higher order relationships among dosimetric dose-volume prognostic variables, interrogate various radiobiological processes, and generalize to unseen data before when applied prospectively. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Several datamining approaches are discussed that include dose-volume metrics, equivalent uniform dose, mechanistic Poisson model, and model building methods using statistical regression and machine learning techniques. Institutional datasets of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients are used to demonstrate these methods. The performance of the different methods was evaluated using bivariate Spearman rank correlations (rs). Over-fitting was controlled via resampling methods. RESULTS: Using a dataset of 56 patients with primary NCSLC tumors and 23 candidate variables, we estimated GTV volume and V75 to be the best model parameters for predicting TCP using statistical resampling and a logistic model. Using these variables, the support vector machine (SVM) kernel method provided superior performance for TCP prediction with an rs=0.68 on leave-one-out testing compared to logistic regression (rs=0.4), Poisson-based TCP (rs=0.33), and cell kill equivalent uniform dose model (rs=0.17). CONCLUSIONS: The prediction of treatment response can be improved by utilizing datamining approaches, which are able to unravel important non-linear complex interactions among model variables and have the capacity to predict on unseen data for prospective clinical applications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".