» Articles » PMID: 24136688

Application of Gene Expression Programming and Neural Networks to Predict Adverse Events of Radical Hysterectomy in Cervical Cancer Patients

Overview
Publisher Springer
Date 2013 Oct 19
PMID 24136688
Citations 15
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The aim of this article was to compare gene expression programming (GEP) method with three types of neural networks in the prediction of adverse events of radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer patients. One-hundred and seven patients treated by radical hysterectomy were analyzed. Each record representing a single patient consisted of 10 parameters. The occurrence and lack of perioperative complications imposed a two-class classification problem. In the simulations, GEP algorithm was compared to a multilayer perceptron (MLP), a radial basis function network neural, and a probabilistic neural network. The generalization ability of the models was assessed on the basis of their accuracy, the sensitivity, the specificity, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). The GEP classifier provided best results in the prediction of the adverse events with the accuracy of 71.96 %. Comparable but slightly worse outcomes were obtained using MLP, i.e., 71.87 %. For each of measured indices: accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and the AUROC, the standard deviation was the smallest for the models generated by GEP classifier.

Citing Articles

Chemical radioanalysis of production of positron-emitting radioisotope Gallium-68 via (p,n) and (p,2n) reactions using compact cyclotron for tomography applications.

Khorshidi A Heliyon. 2024; 10(10):e31499.

PMID: 38813197 PMC: 11133935. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31499.


Serum Proteomic Signatures in Cervical Cancer: Current Status and Future Directions.

Weaver C, Nam A, Settle C, Overton M, Giddens M, Richardson K Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(9).

PMID: 38730581 PMC: 11083044. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16091629.


Prediction and Detection of Cervical Malignancy Using Machine Learning Models.

Devi S, Gaikwad S, R H Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2023; 24(4):1419-1433.

PMID: 37116167 PMC: 10352741. DOI: 10.31557/APJCP.2023.24.4.1419.


Supervised Algorithms of Machine Learning for the Prediction of Cervical Cancer.

F A, C S, L A J Biomed Phys Eng. 2020; 10(4):513-522.

PMID: 32802799 PMC: 7416093. DOI: 10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.1912-1027.


Biometric Identification from Human Aesthetic Preferences.

Sieu B, Gavrilova M Sensors (Basel). 2020; 20(4).

PMID: 32093028 PMC: 7071451. DOI: 10.3390/s20041133.


References
1.
Takayama T, Takayama K, Inoue N, Funakoshi S, Serizawa H, Watanabe N . Prediction of survival and complications after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in an individual by using clinical factors with an artificial neural network system. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009; 21(11):1279-85. DOI: 10.1097/MEG.0b013e32832a4eae. View

2.
Vincent C, Neale G, Woloshynowych M . Adverse events in British hospitals: preliminary retrospective record review. BMJ. 2001; 322(7285):517-9. PMC: 26554. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.322.7285.517. View

3.
Vijaya G, Kumar V, Verma H . ANN-based QRS-complex analysis of ECG. J Med Eng Technol. 1998; 22(4):160-7. DOI: 10.3109/03091909809032534. View

4.
Specht D . Probabilistic neural networks and the polynomial Adaline as complementary techniques for classification. IEEE Trans Neural Netw. 1990; 1(1):111-21. DOI: 10.1109/72.80210. View

5.
Rutledge T, Kamelle S, Tillmanns T, Gould N, Wright J, Cohn D . A comparison of stages IB1 and IB2 cervical cancers treated with radical hysterectomy. Is size the real difference?. Gynecol Oncol. 2004; 95(1):70-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2004.07.027. View