4.7 Article

SurvBenchmark: comprehensive benchmarking study of survival analysis methods using both omics data and clinical data

期刊

GIGASCIENCE
卷 11, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/gigascience/giac071

关键词

survival analysis; machine learning; survival prediction

资金

  1. Australian Research Council [DP210100521]
  2. National Health and Medical Research Council's CRE [APP1135285]
  3. AIR@innoHK programme of the Innovation and Technology Commission of Hong Kong
  4. Research Training Program Tuition Fee Offset and Stipend Scholarship
  5. Dean's International Postgraduate Research Scholarship (DIPRS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article introduces the importance of survival analysis and proposes a new benchmarking design, SurvBenchmark, for evaluating the performance of various survival models on clinical and omics datasets. Through a systematic comparison of 320 comparisons, it demonstrates the variations of survival models in real-world applications and highlights the importance of using multiple performance metrics for evaluation.
Survival analysis is a branch of statistics that deals with both the tracking of time and the survival status simultaneously as the dependent response. Current comparisons of survival model performance mostly center on clinical data with classic statistical survival models, with prediction accuracy often serving as the sole metric of model performance. Moreover, survival analysis approaches for censored omics data have not been thoroughly investigated. The common approach is to binarize the survival time and perform a classification analysis. Here, we develop a benchmarking design, SurvBenchmark, that evaluates a diverse collection of survival models for both clinical and omics data sets. SurvBenchmark not only focuses on classical approaches such as the Cox model but also evaluates state-of-the-art machine learning survival models. All approaches were assessed using multiple performance metrics; these include model predictability, stability, flexibility, and computational issues. Our systematic comparison design with 320 comparisons (20 methods over 16 data sets) shows that the performances of survival models vary in practice over real-world data sets and over the choice of the evaluation metric. In particular, we highlight that using multiple performance metrics is critical in providing a balanced assessment of various models. The results in our study will provide practical guidelines for translational scientists and clinicians, as well as define possible areas of investigation in both survival technique and benchmarking strategies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据