Response to repeat echoendoscopic celiac plexus neurolysis in pancreatic cancer patients: A machine learning approach.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Celiac Plexus
/ diagnostic imaging
Disease Progression
Endosonography
/ methods
Female
Humans
Likelihood Functions
Machine Learning
Male
Middle Aged
Nerve Block
/ methods
Pain
/ etiology
Pain Management
Pain Measurement
Pancreatic Neoplasms
/ complications
Predictive Value of Tests
Treatment Outcome
Artificial neural network
CPN
EUS
Endoscopic ultrasound
Pancreas cancer
Journal
Pancreatology : official journal of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) ... [et al.]
ISSN: 1424-3911
Titre abrégé: Pancreatology
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 100966936
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2019
Sep 2019
Historique:
received:
27
04
2019
revised:
09
06
2019
accepted:
23
07
2019
pubmed:
4
8
2019
medline:
25
2
2020
entrez:
4
8
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
/Objectives: Efficacy of repeat echoendoscopic celiac plexus neurolysis is still unclear. Aim of the study was to assess the efficacy of repeat celiac plexus neurolysis and to build an artificial neural network model able to predict pain response. Data regarding 156 patients treated with repeat celiac plexus neurolysis between 2004 and 2019 were reviewed. Artificial neural network and logistic regression models were built to predict pain response after treatment. Performance of the models was expressed in terms of accuracy, positive predictive value, and positive likelihood ratio. Median age was 62 years (range 39-86) and most patients were male (66%) with pre-procedural visual analogue score 7. Fifty-one patients (32.6%) experienced treatment response, of which 6 (3.8%) complete pain suppression. Median duration of pain relief was 6 (2-8) weeks. Tumoral stage, interval from initial to repeat treatment, response to initial neurolysis, and tumor progression between the two treatments resulted as significant predictors of pain response. The performance of the artificial neural network in predicting treatment response was higher than regression model (area under the curve: 0.94, 0.89-0.97 versus 0.85, 0.78-0.89; p < 0.001). Positive predictive value and positive likelihood ratio resulted 90.3% and 19.35, respectively. Classification error rate was 5.7% with the artificial neural network compared to 14.7% of regression model (p < 0.001). These findings were confirmed through ten-fold cross validation. Pain response following repeat neurolysis is generally less pronounced than after initial treatment. Artificial neural network may help to identify those subjects likely to benefit from repeat neurolysis.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
/Objectives: Efficacy of repeat echoendoscopic celiac plexus neurolysis is still unclear. Aim of the study was to assess the efficacy of repeat celiac plexus neurolysis and to build an artificial neural network model able to predict pain response.
METHODS
METHODS
Data regarding 156 patients treated with repeat celiac plexus neurolysis between 2004 and 2019 were reviewed. Artificial neural network and logistic regression models were built to predict pain response after treatment. Performance of the models was expressed in terms of accuracy, positive predictive value, and positive likelihood ratio.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Median age was 62 years (range 39-86) and most patients were male (66%) with pre-procedural visual analogue score 7. Fifty-one patients (32.6%) experienced treatment response, of which 6 (3.8%) complete pain suppression. Median duration of pain relief was 6 (2-8) weeks. Tumoral stage, interval from initial to repeat treatment, response to initial neurolysis, and tumor progression between the two treatments resulted as significant predictors of pain response. The performance of the artificial neural network in predicting treatment response was higher than regression model (area under the curve: 0.94, 0.89-0.97 versus 0.85, 0.78-0.89; p < 0.001). Positive predictive value and positive likelihood ratio resulted 90.3% and 19.35, respectively. Classification error rate was 5.7% with the artificial neural network compared to 14.7% of regression model (p < 0.001). These findings were confirmed through ten-fold cross validation.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Pain response following repeat neurolysis is generally less pronounced than after initial treatment. Artificial neural network may help to identify those subjects likely to benefit from repeat neurolysis.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31375433
pii: S1424-3903(19)30669-6
doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2019.07.038
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
866-872Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.