Abstract:Abstract Objective To develop a clinically useful model that estimates the 10 year risk of breast cancer related mortality in women (self-reported female sex) with breast cancer of any stage, comparing results from regression and machine learning approaches. Design Population based cohort study. Setting QResearch primary care database in England, with individual level linkage to the national cancer registry, Hospital Episodes Statistics, and national mortality registers. Participants 141 765 women aged 20 years and older with a diagnosis of invasive breast cancer between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2020. Main outcome measures Four model building strategies comprising two regression (Cox proportional hazards and competing risks regression) and two machine learning (XGBoost and an artificial neural network) approaches. Internal-external cross validation was used for model evaluation. Random effects meta-analysis that pooled estimates of discrimination and calibration metrics, calibration plots, and decision curve analysis were used to assess model performance, transportability, and clinical utility. Results During a median 4.16 years (interquartile range 1.76-8.26) of follow-up, 21 688 breast cancer related deaths and 11 454 deaths from other causes occurred. Restricting to 10 years maximum follow-up from breast cancer diagnosis, 20 367 breast cancer related deaths occurred during a total of 688 564.81 person years. The crude breast cancer mortality rate was 295.79 per 10 000 person years (95% confidence interval 291.75 to 299.88). Predictors varied for each regression model, but both Cox and competing risks models included age at diagnosis, body mass index, smoking status, route to diagnosis, hormone receptor status, cancer stage, and grade of breast cancer. The Cox model’s random effects meta-analysis pooled estimate for Harrell’s C index was the highest of any model at 0.858 (95% confidence interval 0.853 to 0.864, and 95% prediction interval 0.843 to 0.873). It appeared acceptably calibrated on calibration plots. The competing risks regression model had good discrimination: pooled Harrell’s C index 0.849 (0.839 to 0.859, and 0.821 to 0.876, and evidence of systematic miscalibration on summary metrics was lacking. The machine learning models had acceptable discrimination overall (Harrell’s C index: XGBoost 0.821 (0.813 to 0.828, and 0.805 to 0.837); neural network 0.847 (0.835 to 0.858, and 0.816 to 0.878)), but had more complex patterns of miscalibration and more variable regional and stage specific performance. Decision curve analysis suggested that the Cox and competing risks regression models tested may have higher clinical utility than the two machine learning approaches. Conclusion In women with breast cancer of any stage, using the predictors available in this dataset, regression based methods had better and more consistent performance compared with machine learning approaches and may be worthy of further evaluation for potential clinical use, such as for stratified follow-up.

Performance evaluation of different regression models: application in a breast cancer patient data

Comparing the Prediction Accuracy of Ridge, Lasso and Elastic Net Regression Models with Linear Regression Using Breast Cancer Data

Evaluation of Machine Learning Algorithms for the Prognosis of Breast Cancer from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Database

A Monte Carlo simulation study comparing linear regression, beta regression, variable-dispersion beta regression and fractional logit regression at recovering average difference measures in a two sample design

Comparative study of logistic regression and artificial neural networks on predicting breast cancer cytology

EVALUATING MACHINE LEARNING ALGORITHMS FOR BREAST CANCER DETECTION: A STUDY ON ACCURACY AND PREDICTIVE PERFORMANCE

The Power Of Simplicity: Why Simple Linear Models Outperform Complex Machine Learning Techniques -- Case Of Breast Cancer Diagnosis

Performance Evaluation of Regression Models in Predicting the Cost of Medical Insurance

Machine Learning Based Comparative Analysis for Breast Cancer Prediction

Accuracy Assessment of Machine Learning Algorithms Used to Predict Breast Cancer

The Application and Comparison of Machine Learning Models for the Prediction of Breast Cancer Prognosis: Retrospective Cohort Study

Multivariate Analysis on Performance Gaps of Artificial Intelligence Models in Screening Mammography

Comparing Breast Cancer Prediction Models

Development and internal-external validation of statistical and machine learning models for breast cancer prognostication: cohort study

Performance assessment of hybrid machine learning approaches for breast cancer and recurrence prediction

Low-rank regression models for multiple binary responses and their applications to cancer cell-line encyclopedia data

Investigating the Performance of Frequentist and Bayesian Techniques in Genomic Evaluation

Breast cancer detection: an effective comparison of different machine learning algorithms on the Wisconsin dataset

Multi-metric comparison of machine learning imputation methods with application to breast cancer survival

A comparative performance assessment of artificial intelligence based classifiers and optimized feature reduction technique for breast cancer diagnosis

Supervised Machine Learning for Breast Cancer Risk Factors Analysis and Survival Prediction