Deep learning-guided adjuvant chemotherapy selection for elderly patients with breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy in elderly breast cancer patients is currently controversial. This study aims to provide personalized adjuvant chemotherapy recommendations using deep learning (DL). METHODS: Six models with various causal inference approaches were trained to make individualized chemotherapy recommendations. Patients who received actual treatment recommended by DL models were compared with those who did not. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to reduce bias. Linear regression, IPTW-adjusted risk difference (RD), and SurvSHAP(t) were used to interpret the best model. RESULTS: A total of 5352 elderly breast cancer patients were included. The median (interquartile range) follow-up time was 52 (30-80) months. Among all models, the balanced individual treatment effect for survival data (BITES) performed best. Treatment according to following BITES recommendations was associated with survival benefit, with a multivariate hazard ratio (HR) of 0.78 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64-0.94), IPTW-adjusted HR of 0.74 (95% CI: 0.59-0.93), RD of 12.40% (95% CI: 8.01-16.90%), IPTW-adjusted RD of 11.50% (95% CI: 7.16-15.80%), difference in restricted mean survival time (dRMST) of 12.44 (95% CI: 8.28-16.60) months, IPTW-adjusted dRMST of 7.81 (95% CI: 2.93-11.93) months, and p value of the IPTW-adjusted Log-rank test of 0.033. By interpreting BITES, the debiased impact of patient characteristics on adjuvant chemotherapy was quantified, which mainly included breast cancer subtype, tumor size, number of positive lymph nodes, TNM stages, histological grades, and surgical type. CONCLUSION: Our results emphasize the potential of DL models in guiding adjuvant chemotherapy decisions for elderly breast cancer patients.

Quantified treatment effect at the individual level is more indicative for personalized radical prostatectomy recommendation: implications for prostate cancer treatment using deep learning.

BACKGROUND: There are potential uncertainties and overtreatment existing in radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PCa) patients, thus identifying optimal candidates is quite important. PURPOSE: This study aims to establish a novel causal inference deep learning (DL) model to discern whether a patient can benefit more from RP and to identify heterogeneity in treatment responses among PCa patients. METHODS: We introduce the Self-Normalizing Balanced individual treatment effect for survival data (SNB). Six models were trained to make individualized treatment recommendations for PCa patients. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to avoid treatment selection bias. RESULTS: 35,236 patients were included. Patients whose actual treatment was consistent with SNB recommendations had better survival outcomes than those who were inconsistent (multivariate hazard ratio (HR): 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.64-0.92; IPTW-adjusted HR: 0.77, 95% CI, 0.61-0.95; risk difference (RD): 3.80, 95% CI, 2.48-5.11; IPTW-adjusted RD: 2.17, 95% CI, 0.92-3.35; the difference in restricted mean survival time (dRMST): 3.81, 95% CI, 2.66-4.85; IPTW-adjusted dRMST: 3.23, 95% CI, 2.06-4.45). Keeping other covariates unchanged, patients with 1 ng/mL increase in PSA levels received RP caused 1.77 months increase in the time to 90% mortality, and the similar results could be found in age, Gleason score, tumor size, TNM stages, and metastasis status. CONCLUSIONS: Our highly interpretable and reliable DL model (SNB) may identify patients with PCa who could benefit from RP, outperforming other models and clinical guidelines. Additionally, the DL-based treatment guidelines obtained can provide priori evidence for subsequent studies.

Genetic influence of meningioma on cisplatin resistance: a Mendelian randomization analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although various aspects of cisplatin resistance have been studied, the impact of genetic variations still needs to be explored. AIM: This study aimed to investigate the impact of cisplatin on meningiomas using a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) approach, employing genetic variants associated with cisplatin use as instrumental variables. METHOD: We conducted a two-sample MR analysis using genome-wide association study (GWAS) data. Instrumental variables were derived from single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with meningioma to estimate the causal relationship with cisplatin resistance. Sensitivity analyses were performed to confirm the findings. RESULTS: Genetic predisposition to meningioma significantly increased the risk of cisplatin resistance (odds ratio (OR): 1.63; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.44-1.85, P < 0.05). Sensitivity analyses supported the causal link. CONCLUSION: This MR study suggests that genetic predisposition to meningioma increases susceptibility to cisplatin resistance. Further research is needed to uncover the mechanisms behind these causal effects.

Causal impact of statins on susceptibility to osteoarthritis: insights from a two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis is a widely prevalent cause of pain and disability among older adults. It is an incurable condition, and most treatments are aimed at alleviating symptoms. AIM: This study aimed to investigate the impact of statins on osteoarthritis by using a two-sample Mendelian randomization approach, using genetic variants associated with statin use as instrumental variables. METHOD: Information on single nucleotide polymorphisms associated with statin medication was obtained from the FinnGen study, and data on osteoarthritis were sourced from the UK Biobank. The inverse variance weighted method was used as the primary analytical approach for the Mendelian randomization analysis. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate horizontal pleiotropy and heterogeneity. To examine the genetic relationship between statins and osteoarthritis, linkage disequilibrium score regression-based estimates were used. RESULTS: Mendelian randomization analysis indicated a positive effect of statin use on the treatment of osteoarthritis (odds ratio 0.951, 95% confidence interval 0.914-0.99, p < 0.05). This conclusion was supported by various Mendelian randomization methods. Sensitivity analyses revealed no significant directional pleiotropy or influential single nucleotide polymorphisms that could compromise the overall causal inference. Linkage disequilibrium score regression-based estimates suggested a modest genetic correlation between statin use and osteoarthritis (Rg = 0.098, Se = 0.034, p < 0.05), thus reinforcing the robustness of the Mendelian randomization analysis. CONCLUSION: Statins reduce the risk of osteoarthritis, aligning with the results of observational studies. Further research is essential to validate these results and explore the underlying mechanisms in detail.

Optimizing adjuvant treatment options for patients with glioblastoma.

Background: This study focused on minimizing the costs and toxic effects associated with unnecessary chemotherapy. We sought to optimize the adjuvant therapy strategy, choosing between radiotherapy (RT) and chemoradiotherapy (CRT), for patients based on their specific characteristics. This selection process utilized an innovative deep learning method. Methods: We trained six machine learning (ML) models to advise on the most suitable treatment for glioblastoma (GBM) patients. To assess the protective efficacy of these ML models, we employed various metrics: hazards ratio (HR), inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW)-adjusted HR (HRa), the difference in restricted mean survival time (dRMST), and the number needed to treat (NNT). Results: The Balanced Individual Treatment Effect for Survival data (BITES) model emerged as the most effective, demonstrating significant protective benefits (HR: 0.53, 95% CI, 0.48-0.60; IPTW-adjusted HR: 0.65, 95% CI, 0.55-0.78; dRMST: 7.92, 95% CI, 7.81-8.15; NNT: 1.67, 95% CI, 1.24-2.41). Patients whose treatment aligned with BITES recommendations exhibited notably better survival rates compared to those who received different treatments, both before and after IPTW adjustment. In the CRT-recommended group, a significant survival advantage was observed when choosing CRT over RT (p < 0.001). However, this was not the case in the RT-recommended group (p = 0.06). Males, older patients, and those whose tumor invasion is confined to the ventricular system were more frequently advised to undergo RT. Conclusion: Our study suggests that BITES can effectively identify GBM patients likely to benefit from CRT. These ML models show promise in transforming the complex heterogeneity of real-world clinical practice into precise, personalized treatment recommendations.

Utilizing machine learning to tailor radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy for low-grade glioma patients.

BACKGROUND: There is ongoing uncertainty about the effectiveness of various adjuvant treatments for low-grade gliomas (LGGs). Machine learning (ML) models that predict individual treatment effects (ITE) and provide treatment recommendations could help tailor treatments to each patient's needs. OBJECTIVE: We sought to discern the individual suitability of radiotherapy (RT) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in LGG patients using ML models. METHODS: Ten ML models, trained to infer ITE in 4,042 LGG patients, were assessed. We compared patients who followed treatment recommendations provided by the models with those who did not. To mitigate the risk of treatment selection bias, we employed inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW). RESULTS: The Balanced Survival Lasso-Network (BSL) model showed the most significant protective effect among all the models we tested (hazard ratio (HR): 0.52, 95% CI, 0.41-0.64; IPTW-adjusted HR: 0.58, 95% CI, 0.45-0.74; the difference in restricted mean survival time (DRMST): 9.11, 95% CI, 6.19-12.03; IPTW-adjusted DRMST: 9.17, 95% CI, 6.30-11.83). CRT presented a protective effect in the 'recommend for CRT' group (IPTW-adjusted HR: 0.60, 95% CI, 0.39-0.93) yet presented an adverse effect in the 'recommend for RT' group (IPTW-adjusted HR: 1.64, 95% CI, 1.19-2.25). Moreover, the models predict that younger patients and patients with overlapping lesions or tumors crossing the midline are better suited for CRT (HR: 0.62, 95% CI, 0.42-0.91; IPTW-adjusted HR: 0.59, 95% CI, 0.36-0.97). CONCLUSION: Our findings underscore the potential of the BSL model in guiding the choice of adjuvant treatment for LGGs patients, potentially improving survival time. This study emphasizes the importance of ML in customizing patient care, understanding the nuances of treatment selection, and advancing personalized medicine.

Personalized surgical recommendations and quantitative therapeutic insights for patients with metastatic breast cancer: Insights from deep learning.

Background: The role of surgery in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is currently controversial. Several novel statistical and deep learning (DL) methods promise to infer the suitability of surgery at the individual level. Objective: The objective of this study was to identify the most applicable DL model for determining patients with MBC who could benefit from surgery and the type of surgery required. Methods: We introduced the deep survival regression with mixture effects (DSME), a semi-parametric DL model integrating three causal inference methods. Six models were trained to make individualized treatment recommendations. Patients who received treatments in line with the DL models' recommendations were compared with those who underwent treatments divergent from the recommendations. Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to minimize bias. The effects of various features on surgery selection were visualized and quantified using multivariate linear regression and causal inference. Results: In total, 5269 female patients with MBC were included. DSME was an independent protective factor, outperforming other models in recommending surgery (IPW-adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.39, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.19-0.78) and type of surgery (IPW-adjusted HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.48-0.93). DSME was superior to other models and traditional guidelines, suggesting a higher proportion of patients benefiting from surgery, especially breast-conserving surgery. The debiased effect of patient characteristics, including age, tumor size, metastatic sites, lymph node status, and breast cancer subtypes, on surgery decision was also quantified. Conclusions: Our findings suggested that DSME could effectively identify patients with MBC likely to benefit from surgery and the specific type of surgery needed. This method can facilitate the development of efficient, reliable treatment recommendation systems and provide quantifiable evidence for decision-making.

Individualized survival prediction and surgery recommendation for patients with glioblastoma.

Background: There is a lack of individualized evidence on surgical choices for glioblastoma (GBM) patients. Aim: This study aimed to make individualized treatment recommendations for patients with GBM and to determine the importance of demographic and tumor characteristic variables in the selection of extent of resection. Methods: We proposed Balanced Decision Ensembles (BDE) to make survival predictions and individualized treatment recommendations. We developed several DL models to counterfactually predict the individual treatment effect (ITE) of patients with GBM. We divided the patients into the recommended (Rec.) and anti-recommended groups based on whether their actual treatment was consistent with the model recommendation. Results: The BDE achieved the best recommendation effects (difference in restricted mean survival time (dRMST): 5.90; 95% confidence interval (CI), 4.40-7.39; hazard ratio (HR): 0.71; 95% CI, 0.65-0.77), followed by BITES and DeepSurv. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW)-adjusted HR, IPTW-adjusted OR, natural direct effect, and control direct effect demonstrated better survival outcomes of the Rec. group. Conclusion: The ITE calculation method is crucial, as it may result in better or worse recommendations. Furthermore, the significant protective effects of machine recommendations on survival time and mortality indicate the superiority of the model for application in patients with GBM. Overall, the model identifies patients with tumors located in the right and left frontal and middle temporal lobes, as well as those with larger tumor sizes, as optimal candidates for SpTR.