Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Is it time to use machine learning survival algorithms for survival and risk factors prediction instead of Cox proportional hazard regression? A comparative population-based study

View ORCID ProfileSara Morsy, View ORCID ProfileTruong Hong Hieu, View ORCID ProfileAbdelrahman M Makram, View ORCID ProfileOsama Gamal Hassan, View ORCID ProfileNguyen Tran Minh Duc, View ORCID ProfileAhmad Helmy Zayan, Le-Dong Nhat-Nam, View ORCID ProfileNguyen Tien Huy
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.11.20.21266627
Sara Morsy
1School of Biomedical sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Bradford, Bradford, United Kingdom
2Medical Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Egypt
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Sara Morsy
Truong Hong Hieu
4Faculty of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh, Viet Nam
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Truong Hong Hieu
Abdelrahman M Makram
5Faculty of Medicine, October 6 University, Giza, Egypt
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Abdelrahman M Makram
Osama Gamal Hassan
6Faculty of Medicine, South Valley University, Qena, Egypt
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Osama Gamal Hassan
Nguyen Tran Minh Duc
4Faculty of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh, Viet Nam
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Nguyen Tran Minh Duc
Ahmad Helmy Zayan
7Faculty of Medicine, Menoufia University, Menoufia, Egypt
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ahmad Helmy Zayan
Le-Dong Nhat-Nam
8Pneumocare, Gesves, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nguyen Tien Huy
9School of Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki 852-8523, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Nguyen Tien Huy
  • For correspondence: tienhuy@nagasaki-u.ac.jp
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Purpose Applying machine learning in medical statistics offers more accurate prediction models. In this paper, we aimed to compare the performance of the Cox Proportional Hazard model (CPH), Classification and Regression Trees (CART), and Random Survival Forest (RSF) in short-, and long-term prediction in glioblastoma patients.

Methods We extracted glioblastoma cancer data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (SEER). We used the CPH, CART, and RSF for the prediction of 1- to 10-year survival probabilities. The Brier Score for each duration was calculated, and the model with the least score was considered the most accurate.

Results The cohort included 26473 glioblastoma patients divided into two groups: training (n = 18538) and validation set (n = 7935). The average survival duration was seven months. For the short- and long-term predictions, RSF was the best algorithm followed by CPH and CART.

Conclusion For big data, RSF was found to have the highest accuracy and best performance. Using the accurate statistical model for survival prediction and prognostic factors determination will help the care of cancer patients. However, more developments of the R packages are needed to allow more illustrations of the effect of each covariate on the survival probability.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

No funding was received

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Availability of data and material The data are available and can be accessed through the SEER database, which is publicly available seer.cancer.gov/data

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • SM: sara.morsy{at}med.tanta.edu.eg

    THH: hhieu.truong{at}gmail.com

    AMM: abd-makram{at}hotmail.com

    OGH: osamagamal4842{at}gmail.com

    NTMD: minhuc1298{at}gmail.com

    AHZ: ahmad_zayan{at}yahoo.com

    LDNN: bacsinam81{at}gmail.com

    NTH:tienhuy{at}nagasaki-u.ac.jp

  • ↵3 Online Research Club (www.onlineresearchclub.org)

Data Availability

Availability of data and material The data are available and can be accessed through the SEER database, which is publicly available at https://seer.cancer.gov/data/.

https://seer.cancer.gov/

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted November 21, 2021.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Is it time to use machine learning survival algorithms for survival and risk factors prediction instead of Cox proportional hazard regression? A comparative population-based study
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Is it time to use machine learning survival algorithms for survival and risk factors prediction instead of Cox proportional hazard regression? A comparative population-based study
Sara Morsy, Truong Hong Hieu, Abdelrahman M Makram, Osama Gamal Hassan, Nguyen Tran Minh Duc, Ahmad Helmy Zayan, Le-Dong Nhat-Nam, Nguyen Tien Huy
medRxiv 2021.11.20.21266627; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.11.20.21266627
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Is it time to use machine learning survival algorithms for survival and risk factors prediction instead of Cox proportional hazard regression? A comparative population-based study
Sara Morsy, Truong Hong Hieu, Abdelrahman M Makram, Osama Gamal Hassan, Nguyen Tran Minh Duc, Ahmad Helmy Zayan, Le-Dong Nhat-Nam, Nguyen Tien Huy
medRxiv 2021.11.20.21266627; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.11.20.21266627

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Health Informatics
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (161)
  • Allergy and Immunology (416)
  • Anesthesia (91)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (860)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (159)
  • Dermatology (97)
  • Emergency Medicine (250)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (394)
  • Epidemiology (8562)
  • Forensic Medicine (4)
  • Gastroenterology (384)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (1753)
  • Geriatric Medicine (167)
  • Health Economics (373)
  • Health Informatics (1244)
  • Health Policy (621)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (468)
  • Hematology (196)
  • HIV/AIDS (374)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (10303)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (553)
  • Medical Education (192)
  • Medical Ethics (51)
  • Nephrology (212)
  • Neurology (1678)
  • Nursing (97)
  • Nutrition (251)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (326)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (451)
  • Oncology (929)
  • Ophthalmology (263)
  • Orthopedics (102)
  • Otolaryngology (172)
  • Pain Medicine (114)
  • Palliative Medicine (40)
  • Pathology (253)
  • Pediatrics (536)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (253)
  • Primary Care Research (208)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (1770)
  • Public and Global Health (3841)
  • Radiology and Imaging (624)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (320)
  • Respiratory Medicine (520)
  • Rheumatology (208)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (168)
  • Sports Medicine (158)
  • Surgery (190)
  • Toxicology (36)
  • Transplantation (101)
  • Urology (76)