GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    In: JMIR Cancer, JMIR Publications Inc., Vol. 7, No. 3 ( 2021-7-2), p. e27970-
    Abstract: Natural language processing (NLP) offers significantly faster variable extraction compared to traditional human extraction but cannot interpret complicated notes as well as humans can. Thus, we hypothesized that an “NLP-assisted” extraction system, which uses humans for complicated notes and NLP for uncomplicated notes, could produce faster extraction without compromising accuracy. Objective The aim of this study was to develop and pilot an NLP-assisted extraction system to leverage the strengths of both human and NLP extraction of prostate cancer Gleason scores. Methods We collected all available clinical and pathology notes for prostate cancer patients in an unselected academic biobank cohort. We developed an NLP system to extract prostate cancer Gleason scores from both clinical and pathology notes. Next, we designed and implemented the NLP-assisted extraction system algorithm to categorize notes into “uncomplicated” and “complicated” notes. Uncomplicated notes were assigned to NLP extraction and complicated notes were assigned to human extraction. We randomly reviewed 200 patients to assess the accuracy and speed of our NLP-assisted extraction system and compared it to NLP extraction alone and human extraction alone. Results Of the 2051 patients in our cohort, the NLP system extracted a prostate surgery Gleason score from 1147 (55.92%) patients and a prostate biopsy Gleason score from 1624 (79.18%) patients. Our NLP-assisted extraction system had an overall accuracy rate of 98.7%, which was similar to the accuracy of human extraction alone (97.5%; P=.17) and significantly higher than the accuracy of NLP extraction alone (95.3%; P 〈 .001). Moreover, our NLP-assisted extraction system reduced the workload of human extractors by approximately 95%, resulting in an average extraction time of 12.7 seconds per patient (vs 256.1 seconds per patient for human extraction alone). Conclusions We demonstrated that an NLP-assisted extraction system was able to achieve much faster Gleason score extraction compared to traditional human extraction without sacrificing accuracy.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2369-1999
    Language: English
    Publisher: JMIR Publications Inc.
    Publication Date: 2021
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2928105-2
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Cancer Research, American Association for Cancer Research (AACR), Vol. 81, No. 13_Supplement ( 2021-07-01), p. LB222-LB222
    Abstract: Background: Genome wide association studies (GWAS) have identified hundreds of common, low risk genetic variants significantly associated with a number of gastrointestinal cancers, but the predictive ability of individual variants or a polygenic risk score (PRS) derived from multiple variants is still unclear especially among minorities. Specific Aims: To evaluate the discriminatory ability of PRS models to differentiate cancer cases vs. controls in patients of European (EUR) and African (AFR) ancestry in an academic biobank. Methods: We identified 445 cases of esophageal, colon, and pancreatic cancers and 12,565 cancer-free controls. Genome-wide significant variants were selected for each of the cancers, and Plink 1.9 was used to generate a PRS, an effect size weighted sum of specific cancer associated alleles for each population. To determine the discriminatory ability of PRS, we performed multivariate logistic regressions in R controlling for age, sex, and the first 10 principal components. Results: There were 285 cases of colon (48.4% AFR), 63 cases of esophageal (34.9% AFR), and 97 cases of pancreatic cancer (51.5% AFR) vs. 12,565 controls (48.5% AFR). Among the EUR individuals, the PRScolon was significantly associated with colon cancer [OR 1.25 (1.06-4.48, p=0.007)] (Table 1). The discriminatory ability of the model comprised of age, gender and principal components was 0.680-0.732 in the respective cancer cancers and the AUC minimally increased to 0.688-0.747 after inclusion of the PRS in the model. Among AFR individuals, the discriminatory ability was overall higher in the full model (AUC 0.755-0.812) but PRS increased the AUC less in AFR vs. EUR. Conclusion: Colon, esophageal, and pancreatic cancer PRS models have a moderate discriminatory ability to identify cases. However, the individual contribution of PRS to the model was small. Further studies are needed to determine additional genetic predictors of cancer risk and how best to incorporate PRS into gastrointestinal cancer risk prediction models. Table 1.PRS Models to predict cancer risk in the Penn Medicine BiobankCancerEURAFREUR Case/Control (%F)AUCOR (95% CI)pAFR Case/Control (%F)AUCOR (95% CI)pColon147/6466 (31.3%/35.5%)0.6881.25 (1.06 - 4.48)0.007138/6099 (60.1%/65.5%)0.7551.255 (1.06 - 1.490.008Esophageal41/6466 (14.6%/35.5%)0.7471.33 (0.94 - 1.87)0.10322/6099 (36.4%/65.5%)0.8090.99 (0.64 - 1.54)0.959Pancreatic47/6466 (25.5%/35.5%)0.7281.06 (0.79 - 1.42)0.70050/6099 (38.0%/65.5%)0.8081.08 (0.81 - 1.44)0.587 Citation Format: Louise Wang, Heena Desai, Anh Le, Ryan Hausler, Shefali Verma, Anurag Verma, Renae Judy, Abigail Doucette, Peter Gabriel, Scott Damrauer, Marylyn Ritchie, Daniel Rader, Rachel Kember, Kara Maxwell. Performance of polygenic risk scores for GI cancer prediction in an academic biobank [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr LB222.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0008-5472 , 1538-7445
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)
    Publication Date: 2021
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2036785-5
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1432-1
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 410466-3
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...