Survival-Based Treatment Planning Using Stage-Specific Machine Learning Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The significance of prognostic survivability in determining optimal treatment strategies for critical illnesses is widely acknowledged. However, there has been a lack of emphasis on the advancement of treatment planning models based on survival outcomes within clinical decision support systems. The research presented in this paper proposes an innovative framework for the planning of treatment strategies based on survival outcomes in the context of multi-stage diseases, with the aim of effectively tackling this issue. Our proposed system aims to predict a comprehensive list of treatment combinations for cancer patients, specifically focusing on their expected survival outcomes. The proposed solution aims to enhance the decision-making process of medical professionals by providing them with comprehensive and comprehensible treatment recommendations. To conduct survivability classification and regression analysis for patients with identical cancer stages, a two-step approach is employed. This involves the development of stage-specific Machine Learning models using breast cancer data that includes treatment information. Based on a real dataset on cancer patients, we aim to investigate the performance of the models under different balancing strategies. Our contribution in this work is the formulation of a treatment planning inference system, which focuses on prognostic considerations. This system utilizes patient data and estimates the survivability associated with each treatment plan in order to predict the recommended course of action. This facilitates the integration of the developed survival prediction models into the process of treatment planning. Ultimately, the system generates visual representations that illustrate the comparative significance of different features, as well as the decision-making process employed by the model in order to yield easily comprehensible outcomes for a specific patient. The study presents experimental findings that illustrate the efficacy of our proposed framework in the domains of treatment planning and survival estimation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".