MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4281392335 · doi:10.1101/2022.04.22.22274185

Asian Lung Cancer Absolute Risk Models for lung cancer mortality based on China Kadoorie Biobank

2022· preprint· en· W4281392335 on OpenAlexafffund
Matthew T. Warkentin, Martin C. Tammemägi, Osvaldo Espin‐Garcia, Sanjeev Budhathoki, Geoffrey Liu, Rayjean J. Hung

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreBrock UniversityLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstitutePublic Health Ontario
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineLung cancerCancerCohortBiobankDemographyChronic bronchitisPopulationInternal medicineEnvironmental healthBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality globally. Early detection through screening can markedly improve prognosis and prediction models can identify high-risk individuals for risk-based screening. However, most models have been developed in North American cohorts of smokers and much less is known about risk factors for never-smokers, which represent a growing proportion of lung cancers, particularly for Asian populations. Methods Based on the China Kadoorie Biobank, a population-based prospective cohort study of 512,639 adults age 30-79 recruited between 2004-2008 with up to 12 years of follow-up, we built an Asian Lung Cancer Absolute Risk Model (ALARM) for lung cancer mortality using flexible parametric survival models, separately for ever- and never-smokers, accounting for competing risks of all-other-cause mortality. Model performance was evaluated in a 25% hold-out test set using the time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and by comparing the model-predicted and observed risks for model calibration. Results Predictors assessed in the never-smoker lung cancer mortality model were age, sex, household income, lung function, history of emphysema/bronchitis, family history of cancer, personal cancer history, BMI, passive smoking, and indoor air pollution. The ever-smoker model additionally assessed smoking status (former vs. current), duration, and intensity. The 5-year AUC based on the hold-out test set for the never and ever-smoker models were 0.77 (95% CI: 0.73-0.80) and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.79-0.84), respectively. The maximum 5-year risk for never and ever smokers were 2.6% and 12.7%, respectively. Conclusions This study is among the first to develop and test risk models specifically for Asian populations, separately for never (ALARM-NS) and ever-smokers (ALARM-ES). Our models identify Asian never- and ever-smokers at high-risk of death due to lung cancer with a high degree of accuracy and may identify those with risks exceeding common eligibility thresholds who would likely benefit from lung cancer screening.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→