MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385578285 · doi:10.1093/noajnl/vdad070.093

SDPS-39 AN UPDATED VALIDATION OF PREDICTIVE ALGORITHMS FOR BRAIN METASTASES IN NON-SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER: SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND INDEPENDENT COHORTVALIDATION ANALYSIS

2023· article· en· W4385578285 on OpenAlexaff
Hannah Wilding, Nicholas Mikolajewicz, Debarati Bhanja, Camille Moeckel, Nima Hamidi, Cyril Tankam, Mason Stoltzfus, Angel Baroz, Caleb Stahl, Mara Trifoi, Cain Dudek, Alireza Mansouri

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology Advances · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCohortLogistic regressionInternal medicineLung cancerStage (stratigraphy)AlgorithmOncologyCohort studyRetrospective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract INTRODUCTION Many non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients eventually develop brain metastases (BM). Reliable risk stratification with predictive algorithms can lead to early intervention. Here, we evaluated the performance of published BM risk-stratification algorithms using an independent cohort of NSCLC patients. METHODS We evaluated statistical models predicting BM in NSCLC by systematically reviewing relevant studies and testing them on an independent cohort of NSCLC patients in electronic medical records (2011-2020) from Penn State Health. Patient data was randomly split into 70% training and 30% testing for modeling using L1-regularized logistic regression, and we assessed the models' performance using ROC analyses. RESULTS Out of 1,643 publications, 22 met our criteria, and 12 of those studies (527,258 patients) included variables consistently available in patient charts. Our validation cohort included 1,699 NSCLC patients, with a median age at diagnosis of 68 and 20.4% developing BM. Among feasible models, Zhang 2021 had the highest performance in our cohort (AUROC [95% CI]: 0.89 [0.85-0.93]) and was comprised of the following predictors: age at diagnosis; surgical, chemotherapy, and radiation status; T and N stage; histological grade; and number of organs with metastases. Within our independent cohort, logistic regression revealed that the most informative predictors were the number of organs with metastases (OR [95% CI]: 3.25 [2.70, 3.92]), age at NSCLC diagnosis (OR [95% CI]: 0.98 [0.96, 0.99]), N-stage 1 at diagnosis (OR [95% CI]: 1.83 [1.08, 3.11]), and non-carcinoid or -carcinoma histology (OR [95% CI]: 0.29 [0.10, 0.84]). CONCLUSION Our robust approach, including systematic review and one of the largest-to-date independent institutional datasets, proposes a clinically feasible, novel algorithm for stratifying NSCLC patients based on risk of developing BM. This work can inform pragmatic screening and surveillance guidelines to facilitate early detection of BM in NSCLC patients.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-Oncology AdvancesSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207