全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

基于机器学习算法的胃肠癌患者术后短期并发症的预测研究
Prediction of Short-Term Postoperative Complications in Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer Based on Machine Learning Algorithm

DOI: 10.12677/ACM.2023.133713, PP. 5017-5035

Keywords: 胃肠癌,术后并发症,应激反应,临床病理特征,列线图
Gastrointestinal Cancer
, Postoperative Complications, Stress Response, Clinical Pathology, Nomogram

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

目的:基于最优机器学习算法确定与胃肠癌术后短期并发症高权重危险因素,开发并验证预测并发症的模型。方法:本研究共纳入胃癌、结直肠癌手术的335例患者,按时间顺序将其分为训练集(268例)和验证集(67例),所有患者均严格监测围术期临床数据和术后短期并发症的发生,利用三种机器学习算法比较确定最优算法,包括随机森林(RF)、支持向量机(SVM)、人工神经网络(ANN),基于最优算法确定与术后7天、30天内发生的并发症相关的高权重危险因素。进而利用确定的危险因素建立基于人工智能的术后7天内并发症、30天内并发症的列线图预测模型。结果:基于最优算法——随机森林成功构建预测术后7天内并发症的模型Nomogram-A’和30天的模型Nomogram-B’。Nomogram-A’在训练集和验证集中的AUC值为0.888和0.805,Nomogram-B’在训练集和验证集中的AUC值为0.937和0.895。表明两模型的预测准确性良好。结论:本研究基于机器学习算法成功构建了预测术后7天内和30天并发症的列线图模型Nomogram-A’和Nomogram-B’,模型有良好的预测准确性。
Objective: To identify high-weighted risk factors for short-term postoperative complications of gas-trointestinal cancer based on optimal machine learning algorithm, and to develop and validate models for predicting complications. Methods: A total of 335 patients undergoing surgery for gastric cancer and colorectal cancer were included in this study. They were divided into a training set (268 cases) and a verification set (67 cases) according to the time sequence. The perioperative clinical data and the occurrence of short-term postoperative complications of all patients were strictly monitored, and the optimal algorithm was compared and determined using three machine learning algorithms, including random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), and artificial neural net-work (ANN). High-weight risk factors related to complications occurring within 7 and 30 days after surgery were determined based on the optimal algorithm. Then the established risk factors were used to establish an artificial intelligence-based nomogram prediction model for complications within 7 days and 30 days after surgery. Results: Models Nomogram-A’ and Nomogram-B’ for pre-dicting postoperative complications within 7 days and 30 days, respectively, were successfully con-structed based on the optimal algorithm, random forest. The AUC values for Nomogram-A’ in the training and validation sets were 0.888 and 0.805, and the AUC values for Nomogram-B’ in the training and validation sets were 0.937 and 0.895. The results show that the two models have good prediction accuracy. Conclusions: In this study, we successfully constructed nomogram models Nomogram-A’ and Nomogram-B’ based on machine learning algorithm to predict complications within 7 and 30 days after surgery, with good prediction accuracy.

References

[1]  Sung, H., Ferlay, J., Siegel, R.L., et al. (2021) Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 71, 209-249.
https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660
[2]  Xia, C., Dong, X., Li, H., et al. (2022) Cancer Statistics in China and United States, 2022: Profiles, Trends, and Determinants. Chinese Medical Journal, 135, 584-590.
https://doi.org/10.1097/CM9.0000000000002108
[3]  Hamet, P. and Tremblay, J. (2017) Artificial Intelligence in Medicine. Metabolism, 69, S36-S40.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metabol.2017.01.011
[4]  Kann, B.H., Hosny, A. and Aerts, H. (2021) Artificial Intelli-gence for Clinical Oncology. Cancer Cell, 39, 916-927.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccell.2021.04.002
[5]  Turing, A.M. (1950) Computing Machinery and Intelligence. Mind, 59, 433-460.
https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/LIX.236.433
[6]  Bhinder, B., Gilvary, C., Madhukar, N.S. and Elemento, O. (2021) Artificial Intelligence in Cancer Research and Precision Medicine. Cancer Discovery, 11, 900-915.
https://doi.org/10.1158/2159-8290.CD-21-0090
[7]  Kaul, V., Enslin, S. and Gross, S.A. (2020) History of Artifi-cial Intelligence in Medicine. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, 92, 807-812.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2020.06.040
[8]  Deo, R.C. (2015) Machine Learning in Medicine. Circulation, 132, 1920-1930.
https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.001593
[9]  Dekker, E., Tanis, P.J., Vleugels, J.L.A., Kasi, P.M. and Wallace, M.B. (2019) Colorectal Cancer. The Lancet, 394, 1467-1480.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32319-0
[10]  Lordick, F., Carneiro, F., Cascinu, S., et al. (2022) Gastric Cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for Diagnosis, Treatment and Follow-Up. Annals of Oncology, 33, 1005-1020.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2022.07.004
[11]  Yuan, P., Wu, Z., Li, Z., et al. (2019) Impact of Postoperative Major Complications on Long-Term Survival after Radical Resection of Gastric Cancer. BMC Cancer, 19, 833.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-019-6024-3
[12]  Bosma, E., Pullens, M.J., de Vries, J. and Roukema, J.A. (2016) The Impact of Complications on Quality of Life Following Colorectal Surgery: A Prospective Cohort Study to Evaluate the Clavien-Dindo Classification System. Colorectal Disease, 18, 594-602.
https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.13244
[13]  GlobalSurg Collaborative and National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit on Global Surgery (2021) Global Variation in Postoperative Mortality and Complications after Cancer Surgery: A Multicentre, Prospective Cohort Study in 82 Countries. The Lancet, 397, 387-397.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00001-5
[14]  Ogata, H., Matsuki, Y., Okamoto, T., et al. (2021) In-tra-Operative Nociceptive Responses and Postoperative Major Complications after Gastrointestinal Surgery under Gen-eral Anaesthesia: A Prospective Cohort Study. European Journal of Anaesthesiology, 38, 1215-1222.
https://doi.org/10.1097/EJA.0000000000001505
[15]  Ghaferi, A.A., Birkmeyer, J.D. and Dimick, J.B. (2009) Variation in Hospital Mortality Associated with Inpatient Surgery. The New England Journal of Medicine, 361, 1398-1400.
https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa0903048
[16]  Lee, J.W., Sharma, A.R., Lee, S.S., Chun, W.J. and Kim, H.S. (2020) The C-Reactive Protein to Albumin Ratio Predicts Postoperative Complication in Patients Who Undergo Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer. Heliyon, 6, e04220.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04220
[17]  Costa-Mattioli, M. and Walter, P. (2020) The Integrated Stress Response: From Mechanism to Disease. Science, 368, eaat5314.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat5314
[18]  Porcaro, A.B., de Luyk, N., Corsi, P., et al. (2016) Robotic Assisted Radical Prostatectomy Accelerates Postoperative Stress Recovery: Final Results of a Contemporary Prospective Study Assessing Pathophysiology of Cortisol Peri-Operative Kinetics in Prostate Cancer Surgery. Asian Journal of Urology, 3, 88-95.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajur.2016.03.002
[19]  Kelliher, L. and Scott, M. (2022) Modifying the Stress Re-sponse—Perioperative Considerations and Controversies. Anesthesiology Clinics, 40, 23-33.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anclin.2021.11.012
[20]  Steinthorsdottir, K.J., Kehlet, H. and Aasvang, E.K. (2017) The Surgical Stress Response and the Potential Role of Preoperative Glucocorticoids on Post-Anesthesia Care Unit Recovery. Minerva Anestesiologica, 83, 1324-1331.
https://doi.org/10.23736/S0375-9393.17.11878-X
[21]  Pedziwiatr, M., Mavrikis, J., Witowski, J., et al. (2018) Current Status of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) Protocol in Gastrointestinal Surgery. Medical Oncology, 35, 95.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-018-1153-0
[22]  Wormser, C. and Runge, J.J. (2016) Advances in Laparo-scopic Surgery. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Small Animal Practice, 46, 63-84.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cvsm.2015.08.001
[23]  Liu, Q., Jiang, P., Jiang, Y., et al. (2019) Prediction of Aneurysm Stability Using a Machine Learning Model Based on PyRadiomics-Derived Morphological Features. Stroke, 50, 2314-2321.
https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.025777
[24]  Hopkins, B.S., Mazmudar, A., Driscoll, C., et al. (2020) Using Artificial Intelligence (AI) to Predict Postoperative Surgical Site Infection: A Retrospective Cohort of 4046 Poste-rior Spinal Fusions. Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery, 192, Article ID: 105718.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2020.105718
[25]  Jiang, Y., Xie, J., Han, Z., et al. (2018) Immunomarker Sup-port Vector Machine Classifier for Prediction of Gastric Cancer Survival and Adjuvant Chemotherapeutic Benefit. Clini-cal Cancer Research, 24, 5574-5584.
https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-0848
[26]  Van Kooten, R.T., Bahadoer, R.R., Ter Buurkes de Vries, B., et al. (2022) Conventional Regression Analysis and Machine Learning in Prediction of Anastomotic Leakage and Pulmonary Complications after Esophagogastric Cancer Surgery. Journal of Surgical Oncology, 126, 490-501.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.26910
[27]  Oka, Y., Nishijima, J., Oku, K., et al. (2005) Usefulness of an Estimation of Physiologic Ability and Surgical Stress (E-PASS) Scoring System to Predict the Incidence of Postoperative Complica-tions in Gastrointestinal Surgery. World Journal of Surgery, 29, 1029-1033.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7719-y
[28]  Monk, D.N., Plank, L.D., Franch-Arcas, G., Finn, P.J. and Hill, G.L. (1996) Sequential Changes in the Metabolic Response in Critically Injured Patients during the First 25 Days after Blunt Trauma. Annals of Surgery, 223, 395-405.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-199604000-00008
[29]  Carli, F. (2015) Physiologic Considerations of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) Programs: Implications of the Stress Response. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, 62, 110-119.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-014-0264-0
[30]  Feldheiser, A., Aziz, O., Baldini, G., et al. (2015) En-hanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) for Gastrointestinal Surgery, Part 2: Consensus Statement for Anaesthesia Prac-tice. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 60, 289-334.
https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.12651
[31]  Romain, B., Chemaly, R., Meyer, N., et al. (2014) Diagnostic Markers of Postoperative Morbidity after Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass for Obesity. Langenbeck’s Archives of Surgery, 399, 503-508.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-014-1180-z
[32]  Watt, D.G., Horgan, P.G. and Mcmillan, D.C. (2015) Routine Clinical Markers of the Magnitude of the Systemic Inflammatory Response after Elective Operation: A Systematic Re-view. Surgery, 157, 362-380.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2014.09.009
[33]  Cuthbertson, D. and Tilstone, W.J. (1969) Metabolism during the Postinjury Period. In: Advances in Clinical Chemistry, Vol. 12, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1-55.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2423(08)60257-7

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133