MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024162587 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2020.2993278

Optimizing Survival Analysis of XGBoost for Ties to Predict Disease Progression of Breast Cancer

2020· article· en· W3024162587 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerOncologyMedicineInternal medicineDiseaseSurvival analysisCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Some excellent prognostic models based on survival analysis methods for breast cancer have been proposed and extensively validated, which provide an essential means for clinical diagnosis and treatment to improve patient survival. To analyze clinical and follow-up data of 12119 breast cancer patients, derived from the Clinical Research Center for Breast (CRCB) in West China Hospital of Sichuan University, we developed a gradient boosting algorithm, called EXSA, by optimizing survival analysis of XGBoost framework for ties to predict the disease progression of breast cancer. METHODS: EXSA is based on the XGBoost framework in machine learning and the Cox proportional hazards model in survival analysis. By taking Efron approximation of partial likelihood function as a learning objective for ties, EXSA derives gradient formulas of a more precise approximation. It optimizes and enhances the ability of XGBoost for survival data with ties. After retaining 4575 patients (3202 cases for training, 1373 cases for test), we exploit the developed EXSA method to build an excellent prognostic model to estimate disease progress. Risk score of disease progress is evaluated by the model, and the risk grouping and continuous functions between risk scores and disease progress rate at 5- and 10-year are also demonstrated. RESULTS: Experimental results on test set show that the EXSA method achieves competitive performance with concordance index of 0.83454, 5-year and 10-year AUC of 0.83851 and 0.78155, respectively. CONCLUSION: The proposed EXSA method can be utilized as an effective method for survival analysis. SIGNIFICANCE: The proposed method in this paper can provide an important means for follow-up data of breast cancer or other disease research.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it