IDDF2024-ABS-0448 Predicting stomach cancer survival in patients with type 2 diabetes: a comparative analysis of machine learning models

<h3>Background</h3> Stomach cancer is a major global health concern and the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Recent studies suggest that patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) have a higher risk of developing stomach cancer. This study aimed to identify the predictors of stomach cancer survival among patients with type 2 diabetes and to compare the performance of different machine learning models in predicting survival. <h3>Methods</h3> The study included 1,912 type 2 diabetes patients with stomach cancer, retrieved from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority Data Collaboration Laboratory (HADCL) from 2000 to 2020. Twenty-two variables, including demographic, clinical, and behavioral factors, were analyzed. Five machine learning models were built and compared: Cox Proportional-Hazards (CoxPH), Gradient Boosting Survival Tree (GBST), Survival Decision Tree, Lasso Penalized Cox Regression, and Random Survival Forest (RSF). Concordance index (c-index) and time-dependent Area Under the Curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the model performance. <h3>Results</h3> Cox regression analysis indicated that older age at diagnosis (HR=1.06, p&lt;.05), longer duration of diabetes (HR=1.04, p&lt;.05), and higher body mass index (BMI) (HR=1.03, p&lt;.05) were the most significant predictors of poorer stomach cancer survival among diabetes patients. The highest c-index for the testing set was found in the GBST model at 0.690, followed by the RSF model at 0.687, Lasso penalized Cox regression at 0.682, the CoxPH model at 0.668, and the Survival Decision Tree at 0.649. In the time-dependent AUC, the GBST model achieved the highest mean AUC, indicating its superior performance. The Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) plot for the GBST model showed that the patients’ survival outcomes were most strongly influenced by age at diagnosis, duration of diabetes, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), fasting glucose, and BMI. <h3>Conclusions</h3> The GBST model demonstrated the highest accuracy in predicting stomach cancer survival among patients with type 2 diabetes. These findings suggest that the GBST model has the potential to improve treatment efficiency by providing more precise identification of risk factors for stomach cancer survival in this patient population.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Clinical Gastroenterology
Published
2024-08-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2024-iddf.344
Primary Topic
Gastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

IDDF2024-ABS-0448 Predicting stomach cancer survival in patients with type 2 diabetes: a comparative analysis of machine learning models

Jinqiu Yuan, Martin C. S. Wong, Junjie Huang, Junjie Hang et al.
Clinical Gastroenterology
Gastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
article

IDDF2024-ABS-0448 Predicting stomach cancer survival in patients with type 2 diabetes: a comparative analysis of machine learning models

Jinqiu Yuan, Martin C. S. Wong, Junjie Huang, Junjie Hang, Qi Dou, Yu Li, Zhaojun Li, Ziwei Huang, Claire Chenwen Zhong
article en

Abstract

<h3>Background</h3> Stomach cancer is a major global health concern and the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Recent studies suggest that patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) have a higher risk of developing stomach cancer. This study aimed to identify the predictors of stomach cancer survival among patients with type 2 diabetes and to compare the performance of different machine learning models in predicting survival. <h3>Methods</h3> The study included 1,912 type 2 diabetes patients with stomach cancer, retrieved from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority Data Collaboration Laboratory (HADCL) from 2000 to 2020. Twenty-two variables, including demographic, clinical, and behavioral factors, were analyzed. Five machine learning models were built and compared: Cox Proportional-Hazards (CoxPH), Gradient Boosting Survival Tree (GBST), Survival Decision Tree, Lasso Penalized Cox Regression, and Random Survival Forest (RSF). Concordance index (c-index) and time-dependent Area Under the Curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the model performance. <h3>Results</h3> Cox regression analysis indicated that older age at diagnosis (HR=1.06, p&lt;.05), longer duration of diabetes (HR=1.04, p&lt;.05), and higher body mass index (BMI) (HR=1.03, p&lt;.05) were the most significant predictors of poorer stomach cancer survival among diabetes patients. The highest c-index for the testing set was found in the GBST model at 0.690, followed by the RSF model at 0.687, Lasso penalized Cox regression at 0.682, the CoxPH model at 0.668, and the Survival Decision Tree at 0.649. In the time-dependent AUC, the GBST model achieved the highest mean AUC, indicating its superior performance. The Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) plot for the GBST model showed that the patients’ survival outcomes were most strongly influenced by age at diagnosis, duration of diabetes, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), fasting glucose, and BMI. <h3>Conclusions</h3> The GBST model demonstrated the highest accuracy in predicting stomach cancer survival among patients with type 2 diabetes. These findings suggest that the GBST model has the potential to improve treatment efficiency by providing more precise identification of risk factors for stomach cancer survival in this patient population.

Clinical Gastroenterology
Sun Yat-sen University (CN), Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK), Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College (CN), Peking Union Medical College Hospital (CN), The Seventh Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 54%
Gastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.