Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1785482
Machine Learning as a Diagnostic and Prognostic Tool for Predicting Thrombosis in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review
Abstract
Khorana score (KS) is an established risk assessment model for predicting cancer-associated thrombosis. However, it ignores several risk factors and has poor predictability in some cancer types. Machine learning (ML) is a novel technique used for the diagnosis and prognosis of several diseases, including cancer-associated thrombosis, when trained on specific diagnostic modalities. Consolidating the literature on the use of ML for the prediction of cancer-associated thrombosis is necessary to understand its diagnostic and prognostic abilities relative to KS. This systematic review aims to evaluate the current use and performance of ML algorithms to predict thrombosis in cancer patients. This study was conducted per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Databases Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov, were searched from inception to September 15, 2023, for studies evaluating the use of ML models for the prediction of thrombosis in cancer patients. Search terms “machine learning,” “artificial intelligence,” “thrombosis,” and “cancer” were used. Studies that examined adult cancer patients using any ML model were included. Two independent reviewers conducted study selection and data extraction. Three hundred citations were screened, of which 29 studies underwent a full-text review, and ultimately, 8 studies with 22,893 patients were included. Sample sizes ranged from 348 to 16,407 patients. Thrombosis was characterized as venous thromboembolism (n = 6) or peripherally inserted central catheter thrombosis (n = 2). The types of cancer included breast, gastric, colorectal, bladder, lung, esophageal, pancreatic, biliary, prostate, ovarian, genitourinary, head–neck, and sarcoma. All studies reported outcomes on the ML's predictive capacity. The extreme gradient boosting appears to be the best-performing model, and several models outperform KS in their respective datasets.
Data Availability
All data are available upon request to the corresponding author.
* These authors are undergraduate students.
Publication History
Article published online:
11 April 2024
© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA
-
References
- 1 Hamza MS, Mousa SA. Cancer-associated thrombosis: risk factors, molecular mechanisms, future management. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost 2020; 26: 1076029620954282
- 2 Wendelboe AM, Raskob GE. Global burden of thrombosis: epidemiologic aspects. Circ Res 2016; 118 (09) 1340-1347
- 3 Fernandes CJ, Morinaga LTK, Alves Jr JL. et al. Cancer-associated thrombosis: the when, how and why. Eur Respir Rev 2019; 28 (151) 180119
- 4 Donnellan E, Khorana AA. Cancer and venous thromboembolic disease: a review. Oncologist 2017; 22 (02) 199-207
- 5 Key NS, Khorana AA, Kuderer NM. et al. Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment in patients with cancer: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline Update. J Clin Oncol 2020; 38 (05) 496-520
- 6 Abdol Razak NB, Jones G, Bhandari M, Berndt MC, Metharom P. Cancer-associated thrombosis: an overview of mechanisms, risk factors, and treatment. Cancers (Basel) 2018; 10 (10) 380
- 7 Navi BB, Reiner AS, Kamel H. et al. Risk of arterial thromboembolism in patients with cancer. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017; 70 (08) 926-938
- 8 Broderick C, Watson L, Armon MP. Thrombolytic strategies versus standard anticoagulation for acute deep vein thrombosis of the lower limb. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021; 1 (01) CD002783
- 9 Pesavento R, Prandoni P. Prevention and treatment of the post-thrombotic syndrome and of the chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther 2015; 13 (02) 193-207
- 10 Bryce Y, Emmanuel Jr A, Agrusa C. et al. Acute limb ischemia in a cancer patient has high morbidity, high mortality, and atypical presentation: a tertiary cancer center's retrospective study. BMC Cancer 2021; 21 (01) 916
- 11 Overvad TF, Ording AG, Nielsen PB. et al. Validation of the Khorana score for predicting venous thromboembolism in 40 218 patients with cancer initiating chemotherapy. Blood Adv 2022; 6 (10) 2967-2976
- 12 Madakam S, Uchiya T, Mark S, Lurie Y. Artificial intelligence, machine learning and deep learning (literature: review and metrics). Asia Pac J Manag Res Innov 2022; 18 (1–2): 7-23
- 13 Habehh H, Gohel S. Machine learning in healthcare. Curr Genomics 2021; 22 (04) 291-300
- 14 Nichols JA, Herbert Chan HW, Baker MAB. Machine learning: applications of artificial intelligence to imaging and diagnosis. Biophys Rev 2019; 11 (01) 111-118
- 15 Ferroni P, Roselli M, Zanzotto FM, Guadagni F. Artificial intelligence for cancer-associated thrombosis risk assessment. Lancet Haematol 2018; 5 (09) e391
- 16 Ferroni P, Zanzotto FM, Scarpato N, Riondino S, Guadagni F, Roselli M. Validation of a machine learning approach for venous thromboembolism risk prediction in oncology. Dis Markers 2017; 2017: 8781379
- 17 Fu J, Cai W, Zeng B. et al. Development and validation of a predictive model for peripherally inserted central catheter-related thrombosis in breast cancer patients based on artificial neural network: a prospective cohort study. Int J Nurs Stud 2022; 135: 104341
- 18 Jin S, Qin D, Liang BS. et al. Machine learning predicts cancer-associated deep vein thrombosis using clinically available variables. Int J Med Inform 2022; 161: 104733
- 19 Liu S, Zhang F, Xie L. et al. Machine learning approaches for risk assessment of peripherally inserted central catheter-related vein thrombosis in hospitalized patients with cancer. Int J Med Inform 2019; 129: 175-183
- 20 Meng L, Wei T, Fan R. et al. Development and validation of a machine learning model to predict venous thromboembolism among hospitalized cancer patients. Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs 2022; 9 (12) 100128
- 21 Muñoz AJ, Souto JC, Lecumberri R. et al. Development of a predictive model of venous thromboembolism recurrence in anticoagulated cancer patients using machine learning. Thromb Res 2023; 228: 181-188
- 22 Xu Q, Lei H, Li X. et al. Machine learning predicts cancer-associated venous thromboembolism using clinically available variables in gastric cancer patients. Heliyon 2023; 9 (01) e12681
- 23 Sarker IH. Machine learning: algorithms, real-world applications and research directions. SN Comput Sci 2021; 2 (03) 160
- 24 Sarker IH, Kayes ASM, Badsha S, Alqahtani H, Watters P, Ng A. Cybersecurity data science: an overview from machine learning perspective. J Big Data 2020; 7 (01) 41
- 25 Quazi S. Artificial intelligence and machine learning in precision and genomic medicine. Med Oncol 2022; 39 (08) 120
- 26 Bi Q, Goodman KE, Kaminsky J, Lessler J. What is machine learning? A primer for the epidemiologist. Am J Epidemiol 2019; 188 (12) 2222-2239
- 27 Otokiti AU, Ozoude MM, Williams KS. et al. The need to prioritize model-updating processes in clinical artificial intelligence (AI) models: protocol for a scoping review. JMIR Res Protoc 2023; 12: e37685
- 28 Bhinder B, Gilvary C, Madhukar NS, Elemento O. Artificial intelligence in cancer research and precision medicine. Cancer Discov 2021; 11 (04) 900-915
- 29 Ed-Driouch C, Mars F, Gourraud PA, Dumas C. Addressing the challenges and barriers to the integration of machine learning into clinical practice: an innovative method to hybrid human-machine intelligence. Sensors (Basel) 2022; 22 (21) 8313