Explainable artificial intelligence to predict the risk of side-specific extraprostatic extension in pre-prostatectomy patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We aimed to develop an explainable machine learning (ML) model to predict side-specific extraprostatic extension (ssEPE) to identify patients who can safely undergo nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy using preoperative clinicopathological variables. METHODS: A retrospective sample of clinicopathological data from 900 prostatic lobes at our institution was used as the training cohort. Primary outcome was the presence of ssEPE. The baseline model for comparison had the highest performance out of current biopsy-derived predictive models for ssEPE. A separate logistic regression (LR) model was built using the same variables as the ML model. All models were externally validated using a testing cohort of 122 lobes from another institution. Models were assessed by area under receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUROC), precision-recall curve (AUPRC), calibration, and decision curve analysis. Model predictions were explained using SHapley Additive exPlanations. This tool was deployed as a publicly available web application. RESULTS: Incidence of ssEPE in the training and testing cohorts were 30.7 and 41.8%, respectively. The ML model achieved AUROC 0.81 (LR 0.78, baseline 0.74) and AUPRC 0.69 (LR 0.64, baseline 0.59) on the training cohort. On the testing cohort, the ML model achieved AUROC 0.81 (LR 0.76, baseline 0.75) and AUPRC 0.78 (LR 0.75, baseline 0.70). The ML model was explainable, well-calibrated, and achieved the highest net benefit for clinically relevant cutoffs of 10-30%. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a user-friendly application that enables physicians without prior ML experience to assess ssEPE risk and understand factors driving these predictions to aid surgical planning and patient counselling (https://share.streamlit.io/jcckwong/ssepe/main/ssEPE_V2.py).
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".