Dataset Information

Predicting Treatment Outcomes Using Explainable Machine Learning in Children with Asthma.

ABSTRACT: Asthma in children is a heterogeneous disease manifested by various phenotypes and endotypes. The level of disease control, as well as the effectiveness of anti-inflammatory treatment, is variable and inadequate in a significant portion of patients. By applying machine learning algorithms, we aimed to predict the treatment success in a pediatric asthma cohort and to identify the key variables for understanding the underlying mechanisms. We predicted the treatment outcomes in children with mild to severe asthma (N = 365), according to changes in asthma control, lung function (FEV1 and MEF50) and FENO values after 6 months of controller medication use, using Random Forest and AdaBoost classifiers. The highest prediction power is achieved for control- and, to a lower extent, for FENO-related treatment outcomes, especially in younger children. The most predictive variables for asthma control are related to asthma severity and the total IgE, which were also predictive for FENO-based outcomes. MEF50-related treatment outcomes were better predicted than the FEV1-based response, and one of the best predictive variables for this response was hsCRP, emphasizing the involvement of the distal airways in childhood asthma. Our results suggest that asthma control- and FENO-based outcomes can be more accurately predicted using machine learning than the outcomes according to FEV1 and MEF50. This supports the symptom control-based asthma management approach and its complementary FENO-guided tool in children. T2-high asthma seemed to respond best to the anti-inflammatory treatment. The results of this study in predicting the treatment success will help to enable treatment optimization and to implement the concept of precision medicine in pediatric asthma treatment.

SUBMITTER: Lovric M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8151683 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimsMost cigarette smokers want to quit smoking and more than half make an attempt every year, but less than 10% remain abstinent for at least 6 months. Evidence-based tobacco use treatment improves the likelihood of quitting, but more than two-thirds of individuals relapse when provided even the most robust treatments. Identifying for whom treatment is effective will improve the success of our treatments and perhaps identify strategies for improving current approaches.MethodsTwo cohorts (training: N = 90, validation: N = 71) of cigarette smokers enrolled in group cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). Generalized estimating equations were used to identify baseline predictors of outcome, as defined by breath carbon monoxide and urine cotinine. Significant measures were entered as candidate variables to predict quit status. The resulting decision trees were used to predict cessation outcomes in a validation cohort.ResultsIn the training cohort, the decision trees significantly improved on chance classification of smoking status following treatment and at 6-month follow-up. The first split of all decision trees, which was delay discounting, significantly improved on chance classification rates in both the training and validation cohort. Delay discounting emerged as the single best predictor of group CBT treatment response with an average baseline discount rate of ln(k) = -7.1, correctly predicting smoking status of 80% of participants at posttreatment and 81% of participants at follow-up.ConclusionsThis study provides a first step toward personalized care for smoking cessation though future work is needed to identify individuals that are likely to be successful in treatments beyond group CBT.ImplicationsThis study provides a first step toward personalized care for smoking cessation. Using a novel machine-learning approach, baseline measures of clinical and executive functioning are used to predict smoking cessation outcomes following group CBT. A decision point is recommended for the single best predictor of treatment outcomes, delay discounting, to inform future research or clinical practice in an effort to better allocate patients to treatments that are likely to work.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Supervised machine learning (ML) is being featured in the health care literature with study results frequently reported using metrics such as accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, recall, or F1 score. Although each metric provides a different perspective on the performance, they remain to be overall measures for the whole sample, discounting the uniqueness of each case or patient. Intuitively, we know that all cases are not equal, but the present evaluative approaches do not take case difficulty into account. OBJECTIVE:A more case-based, comprehensive approach is warranted to assess supervised ML outcomes and forms the rationale for this study. This study aims to demonstrate how the item response theory (IRT) can be used to stratify the data based on how difficult each case is to classify, independent of the outcome measure of interest (eg, accuracy). This stratification allows the evaluation of ML classifiers to take the form of a distribution rather than a single scalar value. METHODS:Two large, public intensive care unit data sets, Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III and electronic intensive care unit, were used to showcase this method in predicting mortality. For each data set, a balanced sample (n=8078 and n=21,940, respectively) and an imbalanced sample (n=12,117 and n=32,910, respectively) were drawn. A 2-parameter logistic model was used to provide scores for each case. Several ML algorithms were used in the demonstration to classify cases based on their health-related features: logistic regression, linear discriminant analysis, K-nearest neighbors, decision tree, naive Bayes, and a neural network. Generalized linear mixed model analyses were used to assess the effects of case difficulty strata, ML algorithm, and the interaction between them in predicting accuracy. RESULTS:The results showed significant effects (P<.001) for case difficulty strata, ML algorithm, and their interaction in predicting accuracy and illustrated that all classifiers performed better with easier-to-classify cases and that overall the neural network performed best. Significant interactions suggest that cases that fall in the most arduous strata should be handled by logistic regression, linear discriminant analysis, decision tree, or neural network but not by naive Bayes or K-nearest neighbors. Conventional metrics for ML classification have been reported for methodological comparison. CONCLUSIONS:This demonstration shows that using the IRT is a viable method for understanding the data that are provided to ML algorithms, independent of outcome measures, and highlights how well classifiers differentiate cases of varying difficulty. This method explains which features are indicative of healthy states and why. It enables end users to tailor the classifier that is appropriate to the difficulty level of the patient for personalized medicine.

Dataset Information

Predicting Treatment Outcomes Using Explainable Machine Learning in Children with Asthma.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets