首页> 外文期刊>Urology >Comparison of two different artificial neural networks for prostate biopsy indication in two different patient populations.
【24h】

Comparison of two different artificial neural networks for prostate biopsy indication in two different patient populations.

机译:比较两种不同人工神经网络在两个不同患者群体中进行前列腺活检的适应症。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVES: Different artificial neural networks (ANNs) using total prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and percentage of free PSA (%fPSA) have been introduced to enhance the specificity of prostate cancer detection. The applicability of independently trained ANN and logistic regression (LR) models to different populations regarding the composition (screening versus referred) and different PSA assays has not yet been tested. METHODS: Two ANN and LR models using PSA (range 4 to 10 ng/mL), %fPSA, prostate volume, digital rectal examination findings, and patient age were tested. A multilayer perceptron network (MLP) was trained on 656 screening participants (Prostatus PSA assay) and another ANN (Immulite-based ANN [iANN]) was constructed on 606 multicentric urologically referred men. These and other assay-adapted ANN models, including one new iANN-based ANN, were used. RESULTS: The areas under the curve for the iANN (0.736) and MLP (0.745) were equal but showed no differences to %fPSA (0.725) in the Finnish group. Only the new iANN-based ANN reached a significant larger area under the curve (0.77). At 95% sensitivity, the specificities of MLP (33%) and the new iANN-based ANN (34%) were significantly better than the iANN (23%) and %fPSA (19%). Reverse methodology using the MLP model on the referred patients revealed, in contrast, a significant improvement in the areas under the curve for iANN and MLP (each 0.83) compared with %fPSA (0.70). At 90% and 95% sensitivity, the specificities of all LR and ANN models were significantly greater than those for %fPSA. CONCLUSIONS: The ANNs based on different PSA assays and populations were mostly comparable, but the clearly different patient composition also allowed with assay adaptation no unbiased ANN application to the other cohort. Thus, the use of ANNs in other populations than originally built is possible, but has limitations.
机译:目的:已经引入了使用总前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)和游离PSA百分比(%fPSA)的不同人工神经网络(ANN),以增强前列腺癌检测的特异性。尚未测试独立训练的人工神经网络和逻辑回归(LR)模型对不同人群的组成(筛查与参照)和不同PSA分析的适用性。方法:测试了两种使用PSA(范围为4至10 ng / mL),%fPSA,前列腺体积,直肠指检结果和患者年龄的ANN和LR模型。在656名筛查参与者(Prostatus PSA分析)上训练了多层感知器网络(MLP),并在606名多中心泌尿科医师中构建了另一个人工神经网络(基于伊穆石的人工神经网络[iANN])。使用了这些以及其他适用于分析的ANN模型,包括一个新的基于iANN的ANN。结果:芬兰组的iANN(0.736)和MLP(0.745)曲线下面积相等,但与%fPSA(0.725)无差异。只有新的基于iANN的ANN到达曲线下方的较大区域(0.77)。灵敏度为95%时,MLP(33%)和新的基于iANN的人工神经网络(34%)的特异性显着优于iANN(23%)和%fPSA(19%)。相比之下,使用MLP模型对转诊患者进行的反向方法显示,与%fPSA(0.70)相比,iANN和MLP的曲线下面积(每个0.83)有显着改善。在90%和95%的灵敏度下,所有LR和ANN模型的特异性均显着高于%fPSA。结论:基于不同PSA测定法和人群的人工神经网络具有可比性,但是患者组成明显不同也允许在测定适应性上不偏向于其他队列。因此,可以在最初建立的其他人群中使用人工神经网络,但有局限性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号