Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Int J Med Inform. 2019 Nov 17;133:104014. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.104014. [Epub ahead of print]

Cost-effective survival prediction for patients with advanced prostate cancer using clinical trial and real-world hospital registry datasets.

Author information

1
Department of Future Technologies, University of Turku, Turku, Finland. Electronic address: mianmu@utu.fi.
2
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Turku, Turku, Finland; FICAN West Western Finland Cancer Centre, Finland.
3
Department of Future Technologies, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
4
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Turku, Turku, Finland; FICAN West Western Finland Cancer Centre, Finland; Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
5
Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland; Department of Pathology, Medicum, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland; Department of Pathology, HUSLAB, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
6
Department of Future Technologies, University of Turku, Turku, Finland. Electronic address: firstname.lastname@utu.fi.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:

Predictive survival modeling offers systematic tools for clinical decision-making and individualized tailoring of treatment strategies to improve patient outcomes while reducing overall healthcare costs. In 2015, a number of machine learning and statistical models were benchmarked in the DREAM 9.5 Prostate Cancer Challenge, based on open clinical trial data for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, applying these models into clinical practice poses a practical challenge due to the inclusion of a large number of model variables, some of which are not routinely monitored or are expensive to measure.

OBJECTIVES:

To develop cost-specified variable selection algorithms for constructing cost-effective prognostic models of overall survival that still preserve sufficient model performance for clinical decision making.

METHODS:

Penalized Cox regression models were used for the survival prediction. For the variable selection, we implemented two algorithms: (i) LASSO regularization approach; and (ii) a greedy cost-specified variable selection algorithm. The models were compared in three cohorts of mCRPC patients from randomized clinical trials (RCT), as well as in a real-world cohort (RWC) of advanced prostate cancer patients treated at the Turku University Hospital. Hospital laboratory expenses were utilized as a reference for computing the costs of introducing new variables into the models.

RESULTS:

Compared to measuring the full set of clinical variables, economic costs could be reduced by half without a significant loss of model performance. The greedy algorithm outperformed the LASSO-based variable selection with the lowest tested budgets. The overall top performance was higher with the LASSO algorithm.

CONCLUSION:

The cost-specified variable selection offers significant budget optimization capability for the real-world survival prediction without compromising the predictive power of the model.

KEYWORDS:

Cost optimization; Feature selection; Prostate cancer; Survival prediction

PMID:
31783311
DOI:
10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.104014
Free full text

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center