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confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the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