Independent validation of a comprehensive machine learning approach predicting survival after radiotherapy for bone metastases

15Citations
Citations of this article
31Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background/Aim: The aim of this study was to analyze the survival predictions obtained from a web platform allowing for computation of the so-called Bone Metastases Ensemble Trees for Survival (BMETS). This prediction model is based on a machine learning approach and considers 27 prognostic covariates. Patients and Methods: This was a retrospective single-institution analysis of 326 patients, managed with palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases. Deviations between model-predicted survival and observed survival were assessed. Results: The median actuarial survival was 7.5 months. In total, 59% of patients survived for a period shorter than predicted. Twenty percent of the predictions of the median survival deviated from the observed survival by at least 6 months. Regarding actual survival <3 months (99 of 326 patients), the BMETS-predicted median survival was <3 months, i.e. correct in 67 of 99 cases (68%), whereas the model predicted a median of 4-6 months in 16 (16%) and of >6 months in another 16 cases. Conclusion: The model predicted survival with high accuracy in a large number of patients. Nevertheless, if the model predicts a low likelihood of 3-month survival, actual survival may be very poor (often 1 month or less). Also, in patients who died within 3 months from the start of radiotherapy, the model often predicted longer survival (16% had >6 months predicted median survival). It would, therefore, be interesting to feed the U.S. database utilized to develop the BMETS with additional poor-prognosis patients to optimize the predictions.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nieder, C., Mannsåker, B., & Yobuta, R. (2021). Independent validation of a comprehensive machine learning approach predicting survival after radiotherapy for bone metastases. Anticancer Research, 41(3), 1471–1474. https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.14905

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free