MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404994159 · doi:10.2196/66269

Interpretable Machine Learning to Predict the Malignancy Risk of Follicular Thyroid Neoplasms in Extremely Unbalanced Data: Retrospective Cohort Study and Literature Review

2024· review· en· W4404994159 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rui Shan, Jing Chen, Zheng Chen, Yuanjia Cheng, Bo Han, Run-Ze Hu, Jialu Huang, Guilan Kong, Hui Liu, Fang Mei, Shi-Bing Song, Bang-Kai Sun, Hui Tian, Yang Wang, Wu‐Cai Xiao, Xiang-Yun Yao, Jingming Ye, Bo Yu, Zheng Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Cancer · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintMalignancyThyroidFollicular phaseThyroid tumorsMedicineComputer scienceInternal medicineThyroid cancerWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Diagnosing and managing follicular thyroid neoplasms (FTNs) remains a significant challenge, as the malignancy risk cannot be determined until after diagnostic surgery. Objective: We aimed to use interpretable machine learning to predict the malignancy risk of FTNs preoperatively in a real-world setting. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at the Peking University Third Hospital in Beijing, China. Patients with postoperative pathological diagnoses of follicular thyroid adenoma (FTA) or follicular thyroid carcinoma (FTC) were included, excluding those without preoperative thyroid ultrasonography. We used 22 predictors involving demographic characteristics, thyroid sonography, and hormones to train 5 machine learning models: logistic regression, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression, random forest, extreme gradient boosting, and support vector machine. The optimal model was selected based on discrimination, calibration, interpretability, and parsimony. To address the highly imbalanced data (FTA:FTC ratio>5:1), model discrimination was assessed using both the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and the area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC). To interpret the model, we used Shapley Additive Explanations values and partial dependence and individual conditional expectation plots. Additionally, a systematic review was performed to synthesize existing evidence and validate the discrimination ability of the previously developed Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System for Follicular Neoplasm scoring criteria to differentiate between benign and malignant FTNs using our data. Results: The cohort included 1539 patients (mean age 47.98, SD 14.15 years; female: n=1126, 73.16%) with 1672 FTN tumors (FTA: n=1414; FTC: n=258; FTA:FTC ratio=5.5). The random forest model emerged as optimal, identifying mean thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) score, mean tumor diameter, mean TSH, TSH instability, and TSH measurement levels as the top 5 predictors in discriminating FTA from FTC, with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.79 (95% CI 0.77-0.81) and AUPRC of 0.40 (95% CI 0.37-0.44). Malignancy risk increased nonlinearly with larger tumor diameters and higher TSH instability but decreased nonlinearly with higher mean TSH scores or mean TSH levels. FTCs with small sizes (mean diameter 2.88, SD 1.38 cm) were more likely to be misclassified as FTAs compared to larger ones (mean diameter 3.71, SD 1.36 cm). The systematic review of the 7 included studies revealed that (1) the FTA:FTC ratio varied from 0.6 to 4.0, lower than the natural distribution of 5.0; (2) no studies assessed prediction performance using AUPRC in unbalanced datasets; and (3) external validations of Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System for Follicular Neoplasm scoring criteria underperformed relative to the original study. Conclusions: Tumor size and TSH measurements were important in screening FTN malignancy risk preoperatively, but accurately predicting the risk of small-sized FTNs remains challenging. Future research should address the limitations posed by the extreme imbalance in FTA and FTC distributions in real-world data.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.051
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0100.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR CancerSame topicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207