Survival analyses for malignancies, including renal cell carcinoma (RCC), have primarily been conducted using the Cox proportional hazards (CPH) model. We compared the random survival forest (RSF) and DeepSurv models with the CPH model to predict recurrence-free survival (RFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in non-metastatic clear cell RCC (nm-cRCC) patients. Our cohort included 2139 nm-cRCC patients who underwent curative-intent surgery at six Korean institutions between 2000 and 2014. The data of two largest hospitals’ patients were assigned into the training and validation dataset, and the data of the remaining hospitals were assigned into the external validation dataset. The performance of the RSF and DeepSurv models was compared with that of CPH using Harrel’s C-index. During the follow-up, recurrence and cancer-specific deaths were recorded in 190 (12.7%) and 108 (7.0%) patients, respectively, in the training-dataset. Harrel’s C-indices for RFS in the test-dataset were 0.794, 0.789, and 0.802 for CPH, RSF, and DeepSurv, respectively. Harrel’s C-indices for CSS in the test-dataset were 0.831, 0.790, and 0.834 for CPH, RSF, and DeepSurv, respectively. In predicting RFS and CSS in nm-cRCC patients, the performance of DeepSurv was superior to that of CPH and RSF. In no distant time, deep learning-based survival predictions may be useful in RCC patients.
Brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is useful for predicting the outcome of patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Although deep learning (DL) using brain MRI with certain image biomarkers has shown satisfactory results in predicting poor outcomes, no study has assessed the usefulness of natural language processing (NLP)-based machine learning (ML) algorithms using brain MRI free-text reports of AIS patients. Therefore, we aimed to assess whether NLP-based ML algorithms using brain MRI text reports could predict poor outcomes in AIS patients. This study included only English text reports of brain MRIs examined during admission of AIS patients. Poor outcome was defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 3–6, and the data were captured by trained nurses and physicians. We only included MRI text report of the first MRI scan during the admission. The text dataset was randomly divided into a training and test dataset with a 7:3 ratio. Text was vectorized to word, sentence, and document levels. In the word level approach, which did not consider the sequence of words, and the “bag-of-words” model was used to reflect the number of repetitions of text token. The “sent2vec” method was used in the sensation-level approach considering the sequence of words, and the word embedding was used in the document level approach. In addition to conventional ML algorithms, DL algorithms such as the convolutional neural network (CNN), long short-term memory, and multilayer perceptron were used to predict poor outcomes using 5-fold cross-validation and grid search techniques. The performance of each ML classifier was compared with the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. Among 1840 subjects with AIS, 645 patients (35.1%) had a poor outcome 3 months after the stroke onset. Random forest was the best classifier (0.782 of AUROC) using a word-level approach. Overall, the document-level approach exhibited better performance than did the word- or sentence-level approaches. Among all the ML classifiers, the multi-CNN algorithm demonstrated the best classification performance (0.805), followed by the CNN (0.799) algorithm. When predicting future clinical outcomes using NLP-based ML of radiology free-text reports of brain MRI, DL algorithms showed superior performance over the other ML algorithms. In particular, the prediction of poor outcomes in document-level NLP DL was improved more by multi-CNN and CNN than by recurrent neural network-based algorithms. NLP-based DL algorithms can be used as an important digital marker for unstructured electronic health record data DL prediction.
Early screening using appropriate biomarkers is helpful for the effective treatment of ovarian cancer. CA-125, the most widely used biomarker for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer, has high false positive and false negative rates. We introduce an approach for determining an appropriate combination of biomarkers known to be highly related to ovarian cancer among 21 predetermined biomarkers. Sera representing 27 cases and 31 controls from women undergoing surgery were examined using high-throughput, multiplexed bead-based immunoassays. Student’s t-test and a genetic algorithm (GA) were employed and compared for building the proper combination of two to four biomarkers. The combinations selected by both methods were compared with a 5-fold cross validation of the LDA classifier. The combination of four markers chosen by the GA had the best performance in regards to accuracy, with sensitivity and specificity of 81% and 100%, respectively.
We propose a tool to calibrate the coefficient variables of the Steinhart–Hart equation, which are used in temperature measurement with a negative temperature coefficient thermistor. The previous method modifies the coefficient variables manually, but the proposed tool takes a measured temperature and automatically modifies the coefficient variable. The proposed calibration tool provides a graphical user interface program for the convenience of users. It is applied to the 4-point temperature measurement of polymerase chain reaction and has a degree of precision of ±0.1 °C in the temperature measurement evaluation
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.