4.6 Article

Development of machine learning models for the prediction of long-term feeding tube dependence after oral and oropharyngeal cancer surgery

Journal

ORAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 148, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2023.106643

Keywords

Artificial intelligence; Squamous cell carcinoma of head and neck; Head and neck neoplasms; Enteral nutrition; Nutritional status

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to predict the necessity of enteral nutrition at 28 days after surgery in patients with head and neck cancers. The results showed that the machine learning models had optimistic accuracy in predicting the need for enteral nutrition, but had moderate sensitivity.
Purpose: To predict the necessity of enteral nutrition at 28 days after surgery in patients undergoing major head and neck oncologic procedures for oral and oropharyngeal cancers.Material and methods: Data from 193 patients with oral cavity and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma were retrospectively collected at two tertiary referral centers to train (n = 135) and validate (n = 58) six supervised machine learning (ML) models for binary prediction employing 29 clinical variables available pre-operatively.Results: The accuracy of the six ML models ranged between 0.74 and 0.88, while the measured area under the curve (AUC) between 0.75 and 0.87. The ML algorithms showed high specificity (range 0.87-0.96) and moderate sensitivity (range: 0.31-0.77) in detecting patients with >= 28 days feeding tube dependence. Negative predictive value was higher (range: 0.81-0.93) compared to positive predictive value (range: 0.40-0.71). Finally, the F1 score ranged between 0.35 and 0.74.Conclusions: Classification performance of the ML algorithms showed optimistic accuracy in the prediction of enteral nutrition at 28 days after surgery. Prospective studies are mandatory to define the clinical benefit of a MLbased pre-operative prediction of a personalized nutrition protocol.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available