120
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Applications of Machine Learning in Cancer Prediction and Prognosis

      review-article
      ,
      Cancer Informatics
      Libertas Academica
      Cancer, machine learning, prognosis, risk, prediction

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Machine learning is a branch of artificial intelligence that employs a variety of statistical, probabilistic and optimization techniques that allows computers to “learn” from past examples and to detect hard-to-discern patterns from large, noisy or complex data sets. This capability is particularly well-suited to medical applications, especially those that depend on complex proteomic and genomic measurements. As a result, machine learning is frequently used in cancer diagnosis and detection. More recently machine learning has been applied to cancer prognosis and prediction. This latter approach is particularly interesting as it is part of a growing trend towards personalized, predictive medicine. In assembling this review we conducted a broad survey of the different types of machine learning methods being used, the types of data being integrated and the performance of these methods in cancer prediction and prognosis. A number of trends are noted, including a growing dependence on protein biomarkers and microarray data, a strong bias towards applications in prostate and breast cancer, and a heavy reliance on “older” technologies such artificial neural networks (ANNs) instead of more recently developed or more easily interpretable machine learning methods. A number of published studies also appear to lack an appropriate level of validation or testing. Among the better designed and validated studies it is clear that machine learning methods can be used to substantially (15–25%) improve the accuracy of predicting cancer susceptibility, recurrence and mortality. At a more fundamental level, it is also evident that machine learning is also helping to improve our basic understanding of cancer development and progression.

          Related collections

          Most cited references125

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Predicting breast cancer survivability: a comparison of three data mining methods.

          The prediction of breast cancer survivability has been a challenging research problem for many researchers. Since the early dates of the related research, much advancement has been recorded in several related fields. For instance, thanks to innovative biomedical technologies, better explanatory prognostic factors are being measured and recorded; thanks to low cost computer hardware and software technologies, high volume better quality data is being collected and stored automatically; and finally thanks to better analytical methods, those voluminous data is being processed effectively and efficiently. Therefore, the main objective of this manuscript is to report on a research project where we took advantage of those available technological advancements to develop prediction models for breast cancer survivability. We used two popular data mining algorithms (artificial neural networks and decision trees) along with a most commonly used statistical method (logistic regression) to develop the prediction models using a large dataset (more than 200,000 cases). We also used 10-fold cross-validation methods to measure the unbiased estimate of the three prediction models for performance comparison purposes. The results indicated that the decision tree (C5) is the best predictor with 93.6% accuracy on the holdout sample (this prediction accuracy is better than any reported in the literature), artificial neural networks came out to be the second with 91.2% accuracy and the logistic regression models came out to be the worst of the three with 89.2% accuracy. The comparative study of multiple prediction models for breast cancer survivability using a large dataset along with a 10-fold cross-validation provided us with an insight into the relative prediction ability of different data mining methods. Using sensitivity analysis on neural network models provided us with the prioritized importance of the prognostic factors used in the study.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Communicating prognosis in cancer care: a systematic review of the literature.

            Prognosis is an issue that most doctors and patients describe as difficult to discuss and the best way of presenting prognostic information to optimise patient understanding, psychological adjustment and decision-making is uncertain. A systematic review of the literature was conducted with the aim of clarifying the current available knowledge of patient preferences, clinician views and current practice regarding the communication of prognosis. Eleven primary research questions guided organisation of the review findings, which were: patient preferences for prognostic information and preferred style of communicating prognosis; disclosure of prognosis to family members; physicians' views on communication of prognosis; current practice of delivering prognostic information; patient understanding and awareness of prognostic information; cultural differences in preferences and understanding; impact of prognostic information on patient outcomes; and interventions to facilitate prognostic discussion. Predictors of patient preferences for and understanding of prognostic information were also summarised. Studies are summarised under the subcategories according to the participants' disease stage. It was found that the majority of the published research has been conducted in the early stage cancer setting providing mostly descriptive evidence, and there is little evidence of the best method of communicating prognosis or of the impact of prognostic information on patient outcomes.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Systems biology, proteomics, and the future of health care: toward predictive, preventative, and personalized medicine.

              The emergence of systems biology is bringing forth a new set of challenges for advancing science and technology. Defining ways of studying biological systems on a global level, integrating large and disparate data types, and dealing with the infrastructural changes necessary to carry out systems biology, are just a few of the extraordinary tasks of this growing discipline. Despite these challenges, the impact of systems biology will be far-reaching, and significant progress has already been made. Moving forward, the issue of how to use systems biology to improve the health of individuals must be a priority. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the field of systems biology and one of its important disciplines, proteomics, will have a major role in creating a predictive, preventative, and personalized approach to medicine. In this review, we define systems biology, discuss the current capabilities of proteomics and highlight some of the necessary milestones for moving systems biology and proteomics into mainstream health care.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cancer Inform
                101258149
                Cancer Informatics
                Libertas Academica
                1176-9351
                2006
                11 February 2007
                : 2
                : 59-77
                Affiliations
                Departments of Biological Science and Computing Science, University of Alberta Edmonton, AB, Canada T6G 2E8
                Author notes
                Correspondence: David S Wishart, 2-21 Athabasca Hall, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB Canada. Email: david.wishart@ 123456ualberta.ca , Fax: 780-492-1071
                Article
                cin-02-59
                10.1177/117693510600200030
                2675494
                19458758
                a5fa1adf-8dfc-40db-bd96-db7e6b62887a
                © 2006 The authors.

                This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).

                History
                Categories
                Review

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                prognosis,cancer,prediction,machine learning,risk
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                prognosis, cancer, prediction, machine learning, risk

                Comments

                Comment on this article