International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2018
Method for Automatic Selection of Parameters in Normal Tissue Complication Probability Modeling.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Christophides Damianos, Appelt Ane L, Gusnanto Arief, Lilley John, Sebag-Montefiore David
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To present a fully automatic method to generate multiparameter normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models and compare its results with those of a published model, using the same patient cohort.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Data were analyzed from 345 rectal cancer patients treated with external radiation therapy to predict the risk of patients developing grade 1 or ≥2 cystitis. In total, 23 clinical factors were included in the analysis as candidate predictors of cystitis. Principal component analysis was used to decompose the bladder dose-volume histogram into 8 principal components, explaining more than 95% of the variance. The data set of clinical factors and principal components was divided into training (70%) and test (30%) data sets, with the training data set used by the algorithm to compute an NTCP model. The first step of the algorithm was to obtain a bootstrap sample, followed by multicollinearity reduction using the variance inflation factor and genetic algorithm optimization to determine an ordinal logistic regression model that minimizes the Bayesian information criterion. The process was repeated 100 times, and the model with the minimum Bayesian information criterion was recorded on each iteration. The most frequent model was selected as the final "automatically generated model" (AGM). The published model and AGM were fitted on the training data sets, and the risk of cystitis was calculated.
RESULTS: The 2 models had no significant differences in predictive performance, both for the training and test data sets (P value > .05) and found similar clinical and dosimetric factors as predictors. Both models exhibited good explanatory performance on the training data set (P values > .44), which was reduced on the test data sets (P values < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: The predictive value of the AGM is equivalent to that of the expert-derived published model. It demonstrates potential in saving time, tackling problems with a large number of parameters, and standardizing variable selection in NTCP modeling.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Data were analyzed from 345 rectal cancer patients treated with external radiation therapy to predict the risk of patients developing grade 1 or ≥2 cystitis. In total, 23 clinical factors were included in the analysis as candidate predictors of cystitis. Principal component analysis was used to decompose the bladder dose-volume histogram into 8 principal components, explaining more than 95% of the variance. The data set of clinical factors and principal components was divided into training (70%) and test (30%) data sets, with the training data set used by the algorithm to compute an NTCP model. The first step of the algorithm was to obtain a bootstrap sample, followed by multicollinearity reduction using the variance inflation factor and genetic algorithm optimization to determine an ordinal logistic regression model that minimizes the Bayesian information criterion. The process was repeated 100 times, and the model with the minimum Bayesian information criterion was recorded on each iteration. The most frequent model was selected as the final "automatically generated model" (AGM). The published model and AGM were fitted on the training data sets, and the risk of cystitis was calculated.
RESULTS: The 2 models had no significant differences in predictive performance, both for the training and test data sets (P value > .05) and found similar clinical and dosimetric factors as predictors. Both models exhibited good explanatory performance on the training data set (P values > .44), which was reduced on the test data sets (P values < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: The predictive value of the AGM is equivalent to that of the expert-derived published model. It demonstrates potential in saving time, tackling problems with a large number of parameters, and standardizing variable selection in NTCP modeling.