SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2308.12188

Development and external validation of a lung cancer risk estimation tool using gradient-boosting

Abstract

Lung cancer is a significant cause of mortality worldwide, emphasizing the importance of early detection for improved survival rates. In this study, we propose a machine learning (ML) tool trained on data from the PLCO Cancer Screening Trial and validated on the NLST to estimate the likelihood of lung cancer occurrence within five years. The study utilized two datasets, the PLCO (n=55,161) and NLST (n=48,595), consisting of comprehensive information on risk factors, clinical measurements, and outcomes related to lung cancer. Data preprocessing involved removing patients who were not current or former smokers and those who had died of causes unrelated to lung cancer. Additionally, a focus was placed on mitigating bias caused by censored data. Feature selection, hyper-parameter optimization, and model calibration were performed using XGBoost, an ensemble learning algorithm that combines gradient boosting and decision trees. The ML model was trained on the pre-processed PLCO dataset and tested on the NLST dataset. The model incorporated features such as age, gender, smoking history, medical diagnoses, and family history of lung cancer. The model was well-calibrated (Brier score=0.044). ROC-AUC was 82% on the PLCO dataset and 70% on the NLST dataset. PR-AUC was 29% and 11% respectively. When compared to the USPSTF guidelines for lung cancer screening, our model provided the same recall with a precision of 13.1% vs. 9.3% on the PLCO dataset and 3.2% vs. 3.1% on the NLST dataset. The developed ML tool provides a freely available web application for estimating the likelihood of developing lung cancer within five years. By utilizing risk factors and clinical data, individuals can assess their risk and make informed decisions regarding lung cancer screening. This research contributes to the efforts in early detection and prevention strategies, aiming to reduce lung cancer-related mortality rates.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Pierre-Louis Benveniste, Julie Alberge, Lei Xing, Jean-Emmanuel Bibault. 2023-08-23. Development and external validation of a lung cancer risk estimation tool using gradient-boosting. https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.12188

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

AUC Maximization from Biased Positive-unlabeled Data with Confidence

Maximizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) is a standard approach to imbalanced binary classification. Although positive and negative data are required for maximizing the AUC, negative data are often difficult to collect in some real-world applications due to privacy concerns or the need for specialized expertise to annotate them. Thus, AUC maximization from positive and unlabeled (PU) data has been attracting attention. Existing methods assume that labeled positive data are unbiased samples from the true positive distribution. However, this ideal assumption is often violated in practice. In this paper, we propose a method to maximize the AUC from biased PU data. To address the bias, our key idea is to exploit {\it confidence}, i.e., the probability that an instance is positive, associated with the small number of labeled positive data. We derive an estimator of the AUC risk using biased PU data with confidence, enabling AUC maximization under such bias. We further show that the rewritten AUC risk induces a Bayes-optimal AUC ranking even when the available confidence is any strictly increasing transformation of the true posterior probability. We experimentally show the effectiveness of our method on eight real-world datasets.

cs.LG

Measuring the Value of World-Model Updates: A Counterfactual Utility Protocol for Continual Adaptation

Continual world models must decide whether new data justify changing the model. Fixed replay schedules and prediction-error triggers specify when to update, but neither reveals the value of an individual update: one deployment run cannot show how the same model would have performed at that moment had it held its parameters. We introduce the fork ledger, which branches a deployment stream at pre-registered decision points into matched update and hold continuations under common random numbers. It evaluates both continuations on the same episodes and records $\Delta R = R_{\mathrm{update}} - R_{\mathrm{hold}}$. Always applying one fixed update mechanism lowers return on all three simulated control tasks: CartPole ($-144.0$; checkpoint-bootstrap $95\%$ CI $[-185.4,-116.1]$, against a converged return near $650$), Walker ($-82.8$; $[-101.1,-61.7]$) and Cheetah ($-18.6$; $[-29.0,-6.6]$). Divergence is an outcome of applying the update, so the estimand counts every attempted fork; restricted to the $693$ of $720$ that did not collapse, CartPole and Walker are unchanged in sign ($-113.4$ and $-82.1$) and Cheetah becomes unresolved ($-3.9$; $[-17.5,+13.0]$). The task is the unit of inference: each contributes $240$ attempted forks over five pretrained checkpoints crossed with two drift directions. The ledger makes counterfactual utility observable for a fixed mechanism, allowing triggers to be judged by the updates they select rather than by surprise detection alone.

cs.LG

When More Is Not Better: Component Anti-Synergy in a P300 Speller

P300 brain-computer interface (BCI) spellers can provide hands-free communication for people with severe motor impairments. Modern pipelines combine multiple individually promising components, often assuming that 'more-is-better'. We tested this assumption using a four-component full-factorial experiment varying the inclusion of Euclidean Alignment (EA), xDAWN spatial filtering, subject calibration, and language model priors on a public P300 dataset. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, repetitions, and information transfer rate (ITR) with mixed-effects models. Results show that the value of components is conditional rather than additive. Calibration was the strongest singular contributor, while EA compensated for its absence in zero-calibration settings. Adding independently useful components could also reduce performance, revealing component anti-synergy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, LM support was not universally beneficial: its effect depends strongly on the strength of the underlying EEG pipeline, while results from a larger LM showed a similar pattern. Together, these findings challenge maximal 'all-on' pipeline design and highlight the value of selecting spatial and language-support components according to the quality of available EEG evidence.

cs.LG