TY - JOUR
T1 - The relation between prediction model performance measures and patient selection outcomes for proton therapy in head and neck cancer
AU - Leeuwenberg, Artuur Marijn
AU - Reitsma, Johannes Bernardus
AU - Van den Bosch, Lisa Griet Lydia Jozef
AU - Hoogland, Jeroen
AU - van der Schaaf, Arjen
AU - Hoebers, Frank Jozef Pieter
AU - Wijers, Oda Bemadette
AU - Langendijk, Johannes Albertus
AU - Moons, Karel Gerardus Maria
AU - Schuit, Ewoud
N1 - Funding Information:
The HTx project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement N° 825162. This dissemination reflects only the author's view and the Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.
Funding Information:
The HTx project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement N° 825162. This dissemination reflects only the author's view and the Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains. J.B. Reitsma: Involvement as methodologist in the development of indication protocols for patient selection for proton therapy in the Netherlands. J.A. Langendijk: Department has research contracts with IBA, RaySearch, Siemens, Elekta, Leoni, and Mirada. Received grants from Dutch Cancer Society and EU. Member of Global Scientific Advisory Board of IBA. Member of RayCare International Advisory Board of RaySearch. Chair of the Netherlands Society for Radiation Oncology. E. Schuit: Involvement as methodologist in the development of indication protocols for patient selection for proton therapy in the Netherlands.
Funding Information:
J.A. Langendijk: Department has research contracts with IBA, RaySearch, Siemens, Elekta, Leoni, and Mirada. Received grants from Dutch Cancer Society and EU. Member of Global Scientific Advisory Board of IBA. Member of RayCare International Advisory Board of RaySearch. Chair of the Netherlands Society for Radiation Oncology.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Author(s)
PY - 2023/2
Y1 - 2023/2
N2 - Background: Normal-tissue complication probability (NTCP) models predict complication risk in patients receiving radiotherapy, considering radiation dose to healthy tissues, and are used to select patients for proton therapy, based on their expected reduction in risk after proton therapy versus photon radiotherapy (ΔNTCP). Recommended model evaluation measures include area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), overall calibration (CITL), and calibration slope (CS), whose precise relation to patient selection is still unclear. We investigated how each measure relates to patient selection outcomes. Methods: The model validation and consequent patient selection process was simulated within empirical head and neck cancer patient data. By manipulating performance measures independently via model perturbations, the relation between model performance and patient selection was studied. Results: Small reductions in AUC (-0.02) yielded mean changes in ΔNTCP between 0.9–3.2 %, and single-model patient selection differences between 2–19 %. Deviations (-0.2 or +0.2) in CITL or CS yielded mean changes in ΔNTCP between 0.3–1.4 %, and single-model patient selection differences between 1–10 %. Conclusions: Each measure independently impacts ΔNTCP and patient selection and should thus be assessed in a representative sufficiently large external sample. Our suggested practical model selection approach is considering the model with the highest AUC, and recalibrating it if needed.
AB - Background: Normal-tissue complication probability (NTCP) models predict complication risk in patients receiving radiotherapy, considering radiation dose to healthy tissues, and are used to select patients for proton therapy, based on their expected reduction in risk after proton therapy versus photon radiotherapy (ΔNTCP). Recommended model evaluation measures include area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), overall calibration (CITL), and calibration slope (CS), whose precise relation to patient selection is still unclear. We investigated how each measure relates to patient selection outcomes. Methods: The model validation and consequent patient selection process was simulated within empirical head and neck cancer patient data. By manipulating performance measures independently via model perturbations, the relation between model performance and patient selection was studied. Results: Small reductions in AUC (-0.02) yielded mean changes in ΔNTCP between 0.9–3.2 %, and single-model patient selection differences between 2–19 %. Deviations (-0.2 or +0.2) in CITL or CS yielded mean changes in ΔNTCP between 0.3–1.4 %, and single-model patient selection differences between 1–10 %. Conclusions: Each measure independently impacts ΔNTCP and patient selection and should thus be assessed in a representative sufficiently large external sample. Our suggested practical model selection approach is considering the model with the highest AUC, and recalibrating it if needed.
KW - Head and neck cancer
KW - Individualized treatment decisions
KW - Normal tissue complication probability models
KW - Prediction performance measures
U2 - 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.109449
DO - 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.109449
M3 - Article
C2 - 36566991
AN - SCOPUS:85145854123
SN - 0167-8140
VL - 179
JO - Radiotherapy and Oncology
JF - Radiotherapy and Oncology
M1 - 109449
ER -