Construction of a predictive model for radiation proctitis after radiotherapy for female pelvic tumors based on machine learning.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Radiation therapy is a main method for female pelvic malignancies, which can cause some adverse reactions, such as radiation proctitis (RP). The incidence of RP is highly positively correlated with radiation dose. There is an urgent need for a scientific method to accurately predict the occurrence of RP to help doctors make clinical decisions. In this study, based on the clinical data of female pelvic tumor patients and dosimetric parameters of radiotherapy, the random forest method was used to screen the hub features related to the occurrence of RP, and then a machine learning algorithm was used to construct a risk prediction model for the occurrence of RP, in order to provide technical support and theoretical basis for the prediction and prevention of RP. METHODS: A total of 100 female patients with pelvic tumors, who received static three-dimensional conformal intensity-modulated radiation therapy in the Department of Radiation Oncology of the Affiliated Hospital of Xiangnan University from January 2019 to December 2020, were retrospectively collected, and their clinically relevant data and radiotherapy planning system data were collected. During radiotherapy and 18 months after radiotherapy, 35 cases developed RP (RP group), and the remaining 65 cases had no RP (non-RP group). The clinical and dosimetric characteristics of patients were ranked by the importance of random forest algorithm, and the independent prognostic characteristics associated with the occurrence of RP were selected for machine learning modeling. A total of 6 machine learning algorithms including support vector machines, random forests, logistic regression, lightweight gradient boosting machines, Gaussian naïve Bayes, and adaptive enhancement were used to build models. The performance of the model was evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and F1 score. Finally, the random forest model was determined as the prediction model, and the calibration curve and decision curve of the prediction model were drawn to evaluate the accuracy and clinical benefit of the model. RESULTS: The parameters for random forest prediction model in the training set were as follow: AUC, 1.000, accuracy, 0.988, sensitivity, 1.000, specificity, 1.000, positive predictive value, 1.000, negative predictive value, 0.981, and F1 score, 1.000. In validation set, AUC was 0.713, accuracy was 0.640, sensitivity was 0.618, specificity was 0.822, positive predictive value was 0.500, negative predictive value was 0.656, and F1 score was 0.440. Random forest showed high predictive performance. Moreover, the Brief of the calibration curve for the prediction model was 0.178, the prediction accuracy was high, and the decision curve showed that the prediction model could benefit clinically. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the clinical and dosimetric parameters for the female pelvic tumor patients, the prediction model of radiation proctitis constructed by random forest algorithm has high predictive ability and strong clinical usability.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".