CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 84

Utilization of model-agnostic explainable artificial intelligence frameworks in oncology: a narrative review

Ladbury, Colton, Zarinshenas, Reza, Semwal, Hemal, Tam, Andrew, Vaidehi, Nagarajan, Rodin, Andrei S., Liu, An, Glaser, Scott +2 more·2022·Translational Cancer Research
DOI 10.21037/tcr-22-1626PMC PMC9641128
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.21037/tcr-22-1626

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 60

  1. [1]Rajkomar A Dean J Kohane I. Machine Learning in Medicine. N Engl J Med 2019; 380: 1347- 58. 10.1056/NEJMra1814259 30943338 · DOI · Paper page
  2. [2]Papernot N, McDaniel P, Goodfellow I, et al. editors. Practical black-box attacks against machine learning. In: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2017.
  3. [3]Diprose WK Buist N Hua N Physician understanding, explainability, and trust in a hypothetical machine learning risk calculator. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2020; 27: 592- 600. 10.1093/jamia/ocz229 32106285 PMC7647292 · DOI · Paper page
  4. [5]Vilone G, Longo L. Explainable artificial intelligence: a systematic review. arXiv preprint 2020. arXiv:200600093.
  5. [6]Gunning D Stefik M Choi J XAI-Explainable artificial intelligence. Sci Robot 2019; 4: eaay7120. 10.1126/scirobotics.aay7120 33137719 · DOI · Paper page
  6. [9]Ribeiro MT, Singh S, Guestrin C. editors. “Why should I trust you?” Explaining the predictions of any classifier. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 2016.
  7. [10]Lundberg SM, Lee SI. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2017.
  8. [11]Mokhtari KE, Higdon BP, Başar A. editors. Interpreting financial time series with SHAP values. In: Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering, 2019.
  9. [12]Kuo K, Lupton D. Towards explainability of machine learning models in insurance pricing. arXiv preprint 2020. arXiv:200310674.
  10. [13]Lundberg SM Nair B Vavilala MS Explainable machine-learning predictions for the prevention of hypoxaemia during surgery. Nat Biomed Eng 2018; 2: 749- 60. 10.1038/s41551-018-0304-0 31001455 PMC6467492 · DOI · Paper page
  11. [15]Li R Shinde A Liu A Machine Learning-Based Interpretation and Visualization of Nonlinear Interactions in Prostate Cancer Survival. JCO Clin Cancer Inform 2020; 4: 637- 46. 10.1200/CCI.20.00002 32673068 · DOI
  12. [16]Bertsimas D Margonis GA Huang Y Toward an Optimized Staging System for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Clinically Interpretable, Artificial Intelligence-Based Model. JCO Clin Cancer Inform 2021; 5: 1220- 31. 10.1200/CCI.21.00001 34936469 PMC9848537 · DOI
  13. [17]Jansen T Geleijnse G Van Maaren M Machine Learning Explainability in Breast Cancer Survival. Stud Health Technol Inform 2020; 270: 307- 11. 32570396
  14. [18]Chen X Li Y Li X An interpretable machine learning prognostic system for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma based on tumor burden features. Oral Oncol 2021; 118: 105335. 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2021.105335 34023742 · DOI
  15. [19]Moncada-Torres A van Maaren MC Hendriks MP Explainable machine learning can outperform Cox regression predictions and provide insights in breast cancer survival. Sci Rep 2021; 11: 6968. 10.1038/s41598-021-86327-7 33772109 PMC7998037 · DOI
  16. [20]van den Bosch T Warps AK de Nerée Tot Babberich MPM Predictors of 30-Day Mortality Among Dutch Patients Undergoing Colorectal Cancer Surgery, 2011-2016. JAMA Netw Open 2021; 4: e217737. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.7737 33900400 PMC8076964 · DOI
  17. [21]Gong X Zheng B Xu G Application of machine learning approaches to predict the 5-year survival status of patients with esophageal cancer. J Thorac Dis 2021; 13: 6240- 51. 10.21037/jtd-21-1107 34992804 PMC8662490 · DOI
  18. [22]Farswan A Gupta A Sriram K Does Ethnicity Matter in Multiple Myeloma Risk Prediction in the Era of Genomics and Novel Agents? Evidence From Real-World Data. Front Oncol 2021; 11: 720932. 10.3389/fonc.2021.720932 34858811 PMC8630746 · DOI
  19. [23]Alsinglawi B Alshari O Alorjani M An explainable machine learning framework for lung cancer hospital length of stay prediction. Sci Rep 2022; 12: 607. 10.1038/s41598-021-04608-7 35022512 PMC8755804 · DOI
  20. [24]Jacobson D Cadieux B Higano CS Risk factors associated with skeletal-related events following discontinuation of denosumab treatment among patients with bone metastases from solid tumors: A real-world machine learning approach. J Bone Oncol 2022; 34: 100423. 10.1016/j.jbo.2022.100423 35378840 PMC8976128 · DOI
  21. [25]Suh J Yoo S Park J Development and validation of an explainable artificial intelligence-based decision-supporting tool for prostate biopsy. BJU Int 2020; 126: 694- 703. 10.1111/bju.15122 32455477 · DOI · Paper page
  22. [26]Kwong JCC Khondker A Tran C Explainable artificial intelligence to predict the risk of side-specific extraprostatic extension in pre-prostatectomy patients. Can Urol Assoc J 2022; 16: 213- 21. 10.5489/cuaj.7473 35099382 PMC9245956 · DOI
  23. [27]Incoronato M Aiello M Infante T Radiogenomic Analysis of Oncological Data: A Technical Survey. Int J Mol Sci 2017; 18: 805. 10.3390/ijms18040805 28417933 PMC5412389 · DOI
  24. [28]Liu Z Wang S Dong D The Applications of Radiomics in Precision Diagnosis and Treatment of Oncology: Opportunities and Challenges. Theranostics 2019; 9: 1303- 22. 10.7150/thno.30309 30867832 PMC6401507 · DOI
  25. [30]Ludwig K Kornblum HI. Molecular markers in glioma. J Neurooncol 2017; 134: 505- 12. 10.1007/s11060-017-2379-y 28233083 PMC5568999 · DOI
  26. [31]Manikis GC Ioannidis GS Siakallis L Multicenter DSC-MRI-Based Radiomics Predict IDH Mutation in Gliomas. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13: 3965. 10.3390/cancers13163965 34439118 PMC8391559 · DOI
  27. [32]Gaur L Bhandari M Razdan T Explanation-Driven Deep Learning Model for Prediction of Brain Tumour Status Using MRI Image Data. Front Genet 2022; 13: 822666. 10.3389/fgene.2022.822666 35360838 PMC8964286 · DOI
  28. [33]Lee YW Huang CS Shih CC Axillary lymph node metastasis status prediction of early-stage breast cancer using convolutional neural networks. Comput Biol Med 2021; 130: 104206. 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2020.104206 33421823 · DOI
  29. [34]Kha QH Le VH Hung TNK Development and Validation of an Efficient MRI Radiomics Signature for Improving the Predictive Performance of 1p/19q Co-Deletion in Lower-Grade Gliomas. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13: 5398. 10.3390/cancers13215398 34771562 PMC8582370 · DOI
  30. [35]Du R Lee VH Yuan H Radiomics Model to Predict Early Progression of Nonmetastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma after Intensity Modulation Radiation Therapy: A Multicenter Study. Radiol Artif Intell 2019; 1: e180075. 10.1148/ryai.2019180075 33937796 PMC8017427 · DOI
  31. [36]Wang F Wang D Xu Y Potential of the Non-Contrast-Enhanced Chest CT Radiomics to Distinguish Molecular Subtypes of Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Study. Front Oncol 2022; 12: 848726. 10.3389/fonc.2022.848726 35387125 PMC8979294 · DOI
  32. [38]Abir WH Uddin MF Khanam FR Explainable AI in Diagnosing and Anticipating Leukemia Using Transfer Learning Method. Comput Intell Neurosci 2022; 2022: 5140148. 10.1155/2022/5140148 35528341 PMC9068323 · DOI
  33. [39]Modhukur V Sharma S Mondal M Machine Learning Approaches to Classify Primary and Metastatic Cancers Using Tissue of Origin-Based DNA Methylation Profiles. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13: 3768. 10.3390/cancers13153768 34359669 PMC8345047 · DOI
  34. [40]Chakraborty D Ivan C Amero P Explainable Artificial Intelligence Reveals Novel Insight into Tumor Microenvironment Conditions Linked with Better Prognosis in Patients with Breast Cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13: 3450. 10.3390/cancers13143450 34298668 PMC8303703 · DOI
  35. [41]Janssen FM Aben KK Heesterman BL Using Explainable Machine Learning to Explore the Impact of Synoptic Reporting on Prostate Cancer. Algorithms 2022; 15: 49. 10.3390/a15020049 · DOI
  36. [42]Meena J Hasija Y. Application of explainable artificial intelligence in the identification of Squamous Cell Carcinoma biomarkers. Comput Biol Med 2022; 146: 105505. 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2022.105505 35477047 · DOI
  37. [43]Park KH Batbaatar E Piao Y Deep Learning Feature Extraction Approach for Hematopoietic Cancer Subtype Classification. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021; 18: 2197. 10.3390/ijerph18042197 33672300 PMC7926954 · DOI
  38. [44]Ladbury C Li R Shiao J Characterizing impact of positive lymph node number in endometrial cancer using machine-learning: A better prognostic indicator than FIGO staging? Gynecol Oncol 2022; 164: 39- 45. 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.11.007 34794840 · DOI
  39. [45]Zarinshenas R Ladbury C McGee H Machine learning to refine prognostic and predictive nodal burden thresholds for post-operative radiotherapy in completely resected stage III-N2 non-small cell lung cancer. Radiother Oncol 2022; 173: 10- 8. 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.05.019 35618098 · DOI
  40. [46]Matei D Filiaci V Randall ME Adjuvant Chemotherapy plus Radiation for Locally Advanced Endometrial Cancer. N Engl J Med 2019; 380: 2317- 26. 10.1056/NEJMoa1813181 31189035 PMC6948006 · DOI
  41. [47]de Boer SM Powell ME Mileshkin L Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone for women with high-risk endometrial cancer (PORTEC-3): final results of an international, open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2018; 19: 295- 309. 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30079-2 29449189 PMC5840256 · DOI
  42. [48]Le Pechoux C Pourel N Barlesi F Postoperative radiotherapy versus no postoperative radiotherapy in patients with completely resected non-small-cell lung cancer and proven mediastinal N2 involvement (Lung ART): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2022; 23: 104- 14. 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00606-9 34919827 · DOI
  43. [49]Hui Z Men Y Hu C Effect of Postoperative Radiotherapy for Patients With pIIIA-N2 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer After Complete Resection and Adjuvant Chemotherapy: The Phase 3 PORT-C Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol 2021; 7: 1178- 85. 10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.1910 34165501 PMC8227450 · DOI
  44. [50]Laios A Kalampokis E Johnson R Explainable Artificial Intelligence for Prediction of Complete Surgical Cytoreduction in Advanced-Stage Epithelial Ovarian Cancer. J Pers Med 2022; 12: 607. 10.3390/jpm12040607 35455723 PMC9030484 · DOI
  45. [51]Bang CS Ahn JY Kim JH Establishing Machine Learning Models to Predict Curative Resection in Early Gastric Cancer with Undifferentiated Histology: Development and Usability Study. J Med Internet Res 2021; 23: e25053. 10.2196/25053 33856358 PMC8085749 · DOI
  46. [52]Ahmed ZU Sun K Shelly M Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) for exploring spatial variability of lung and bronchus cancer (LBC) mortality rates in the contiguous USA. Sci Rep 2021; 11: 24090. 10.1038/s41598-021-03198-8 34916529 PMC8677843 · DOI
  47. [53]Kobylińska K Orłowski T Adamek M Explainable Machine Learning for Lung Cancer Screening Models. Applied Sciences 2022; 12: 1926. 10.3390/app12041926 · DOI
  48. [54]Richter AN Khoshgoftaar TM. Efficient learning from big data for cancer risk modeling: A case study with melanoma. Comput Biol Med 2019; 110: 29- 39. 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2019.04.039 31112896 · DOI
  49. [55]Siciarz P Alfaifi S Uytven EV Machine learning for dose-volume histogram based clinical decision-making support system in radiation therapy plans for brain tumors. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2021; 31: 50- 7. 10.1016/j.ctro.2021.09.001 34632117 PMC8487981 · DOI
  50. [56]Chen Y Aleman DM Purdie TG Understanding machine learning classifier decisions in automated radiotherapy quality assurance. Phys Med Biol 2022. doi:. 10.1088/1361-6560/ac3e0e 34844219 · DOI
  51. [57]Kalet AM Doctor JN Gennari JH Developing Bayesian networks from a dependency-layered ontology: A proof-of-concept in radiation oncology. Med Phys 2017; 44: 4350- 9. 10.1002/mp.12340 28500765 · DOI
  52. [58]Trilla-Fuertes L Gámez-Pozo A Arevalillo JM Bayesian networks established functional differences between breast cancer subtypes. PLoS One 2020; 15: e0234752. 10.1371/journal.pone.0234752 32525929 PMC7289386 · DOI
  53. [59]Park SB Hwang KT Chung CK Causal Bayesian gene networks associated with bone, brain and lung metastasis of breast cancer. Clin Exp Metastasis 2020; 37: 657- 74. 10.1007/s10585-020-10060-0 33083937 · DOI
  54. [60]Wang X Branciamore S Gogoshin G New Analysis Framework Incorporating Mixed Mutual Information and Scalable Bayesian Networks for Multimodal High Dimensional Genomic and Epigenomic Cancer Data. Front Genet 2020; 11: 648. 10.3389/fgene.2020.00648 32625238 PMC7314938 · DOI
  55. [61]Djulbegovic B Hozo I Dale W. Transforming clinical practice guidelines and clinical pathways into fast-and-frugal decision trees to improve clinical care strategies. J Eval Clin Pract 2018; 24: 1247- 54. 10.1111/jep.12895 29484787 · DOI
  56. [62]Sundrani S Lu J. Computing the Hazard Ratios Associated With Explanatory Variables Using Machine Learning Models of Survival Data. JCO Clin Cancer Inform 2021; 5: 364- 78. 10.1200/CCI.20.00172 33797958 · DOI
  57. [63]Marcílio WE, Eler DM. editors. From explanations to feature selection: assessing SHAP values as feature selection mechanism. In: 2020 33rd SIBGRAPI Conference on Graphics, Patterns and Images (SIBGRAPI), 2020.
  58. [64]Duval A. Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI). 2019. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alexandre-Duval-2/publication/332209054_Explainable_Artificial_Intelligence_XAI/links/5ca6269aa6fdcca26dfec0cd/Explainable-Artificial-Intelligence-XAI.pdf
  59. [65]Rudin C. Stop Explaining Black Box Machine Learning Models for High Stakes Decisions and Use Interpretable Models Instead. Nat Mach Intell 2019; 1: 206- 15. 10.1038/s42256-019-0048-x 35603010 PMC9122117 · DOI · Paper page
  60. [66]Yang S Wen J Eckert ST Prioritizing genetic variants in GWAS with lasso using permutation-assisted tuning. Bioinformatics 2020; 36: 3811- 7. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btaa229 32246825 PMC7320616 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ladbury, C., Zarinshenas, R., Semwal, H., Tam, A., Vaidehi, N., Rodin, A. S., Liu, A., Glaser, S., Salgia, R., & Amini, A.
Venue
Translational Cancer Research
Publisher
AME Publishing Company
Published
2022-10
Volume
11
Issue
10
Pages
3853-3868
ISSN
  • 2218-676X
  • 2219-6803
DOI
10.21037/tcr-22-1626
PMC
PMC9641128
Cited by
84
References
9

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review