Abstract:BACKGROUND: Electronic patient files generate an enormous amount of medical data. These data can be used for research, such as prognostic modeling. Automatization of statistical prognostication processes allows automatic updating of models when new data is gathered. The increase of power behind an automated prognostic model makes its predictive capability more reliable. Cox proportional hazard regression is most frequently used in prognostication. Automatization of a Cox model is possible, but we expect the updating process to be time-consuming. A possible solution lies in an alternative modeling technique called random survival forests (RSFs). RSF is easily automated and is known to handle the proportionality assumption coherently and automatically. Performance of RSF has not yet been tested on a large head and neck oncological dataset. This study investigates performance of head and neck overall survival of RSF models. Performances are compared to a Cox model as the "gold standard." RSF might be an interesting alternative modeling approach for automatization when performances are similar.METHODS: RSF models were created in R (Cox also in SPSS). Four RSF splitting rules were used: log-rank, conservation of events, log-rank score, and log-rank approximation. Models were based on historical data of 1371 patients with primary head-and-neck cancer, diagnosed between 1981 and 1998. Models contain 8 covariates: tumor site, T classification, N classification, M classification, age, sex, prior malignancies, and comorbidity. Model performances were determined by Harrell's concordance error rate, in which 33% of the original data served as a validation sample.RESULTS: RSF and Cox models delivered similar error rates. The Cox model performed slightly better (error rate, 0.2826). The log-rank splitting approach gave the best RSF performance (error rate, 0.2873). In accord with Cox and RSF models, high T classification, high N classification, and severe comorbidity are very important covariates in the model, whereas sex, mild comorbidity, and a supraglottic larynx tumor are less important. A discrepancy arose regarding the importance of M1 classification (see Discussion).CONCLUSION: Both approaches delivered similar error rates. The Cox model gives a clinically understandable output on covariate impact, whereas RSF becomes more of a "black box." RSF complements the Cox model by giving more insight and confidence toward relative importance of model covariates. RSF can be recommended as the approach of choice in automating survival analyses.

Penalized semiparametric Cox regression model on XGBoost and random survival forests

An empirical comparison between gradient boosting methods and cox's proportional hazards model for right-censored survival data

Optimizing Survival Analysis of XGBoost for Ties to Predict Disease Progression of Breast Cancer

Survival regression with accelerated failure time model in XGBoost

Buckley–James boosting model based on extreme learning machine and random survival forests

FPBoost: Fully Parametric Gradient Boosting for Survival Analysis

Novel head and neck cancer survival analysis approach: Random survival forests versus cox proportional hazards regression

Semi-parametric Regression Model for Survival Data: Graphical Visualization with R.

On the Maximum Penalized Full Likelihood Approach for Cox Model with Extreme Value for Heavily Censored Survival Data

Variable Selection with Random Survival Forest and Bayesian Additive Regression Tree for Survival Data

Survival Models: Proper Scoring Rule and Stochastic Optimization with Competing Risks

Individual risk prediction: Comparing random forests with Cox proportional‐hazards model by a simulation study

A comparison of random survival forest and Cox regression for prediction of mortality in patients with hemorrhagic stroke

Unbiased Prediction and Feature Selection in High-Dimensional Survival Regression

Random forests for survival data: which methods work best and under what conditions?

Balanced Random Survival Forests for Extremely Unbalanced, Right Censored Data

SurvMaximin: Robust federated approach to transporting survival risk prediction models

Unbiased split variable selection for random survival forests using maximally selected rank statistics

A XGBoost risk model via feature selection and Bayesian hyper-parameter optimization

Penalized variable selection in multi-parameter regression survival modeling

ggRandomForests: Exploring Random Forest Survival