Download - Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

Transcript
Page 1: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

NomogramsWhy, When, What, How use?..

….but

The 2nd World Congress on

Controversies in Urology (CURy)

Lisbon, Portugal, February 5- 8, 2009

Vincent HUPERTAN, M.D., MR

Lyon University - E.R.I.C. Knowledge engineering

Page 3: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

Nomogram ≠ predictive model(PM)is the graphical representation of

mathematical relationships or laws (Etymology: Greek nomos = law)

or a graphical calculating device, a two-dimensional diagram designed to allow the approximate graphical computation of a function.

Fah

ren

heit

vs.

Cels

ius

scale

Page 4: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

• This slideshow is a visual support for interventions Dr. Hupertan as expert or trainer during training seminars , courses for medical students, conferences or congresses .

• This slideshow created by Dr. Hupertan , MD , is intended primarily for health professionals in training ( medical students , interns and clinical leaders ) or not (doctors,... ) .

• This slide contains links to other sites.

• Conflict of interest : "no declared conflicts of interest "

• Using Slideshow : this slideshow can be downloaded , used while mentioning the author.

Page 5: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

Predictive nomogram★ A device that suppose two

elements:

1. equation of an

event probability

2. specific functional

representation in a

graphic form

Page 6: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

Why?1. The necessity to improve the decision making process in

oncology1. Clinical heterogeneity of cancers2. Importance quantity / quality of life ratio3. Perfect treatment = utopia⇒ maximize cancer control/ minimize treatment morbidity

2. Lack of performance in prediction of the clinical judgment (CJ)1. The clinician (experts) out-perform prediction classifiers= too much

weight on their own judgment2. Human mental process prove difficulties to use numbers3. Emotional considerations: particular cases are more “weighted” ⇒ Accuracy of the prediction of the PM >> CJ

3. Paucity of RCT data implying a lack of the “evidence”*)=> we should use data to improve the medical decision making process, implying more actively patient in that

*)Evidence Based Medicine

Page 7: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

… yes, BUT:

1. Maximize cancer control/ minimize treatment morbidity OK, BUT:Does exist nomogram able to predict in same time cancer control

and treatment morbidity?How to predict cancer control: survival? surrogate end points?What means treatment morbidity in a statistical point of view: QoL

score? Erection function IIEF?

2. Accuracy of the prediction of the PM >> CJ OK, BUT: Y=f(X1, X2, X3, ..,Xi)! Y=[ Y1, Y2, Y3, ..,Yn ]=f(X1, X2, X3, ..,Xm)! m inputs => n outputs (social, familial, sexual....)

Þ Imply more actively patient in the medical decision making process OK BUT: well informed patient = associate probability to each possible outcome ? Let himself on the new to compute the risk hazard? What probability he will choice you?

Page 8: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

When?

To inform the patient about the outcome that MIGHT BE!

…the fact that predict the issue will change:diagnostic procedurestreatment choice (alternative treatments, adjuvant

treatment exists) or treatment modalities (extension of the lymph-nodes dissection)

follow-up

Page 9: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

What “nomogram” to choose?(nomogram specifications)

1. Functional representation of the nomogram:Ergonomy, simplicity

2. Nomogram core(PM):Output:

relevant for the clinical practice;Data set used for the learning process:

Patients: geographic area, academic centersPredictors:

variability(inter rather,within rather),standardization

colinearity? significative features?exhaustivity or parsimony?

Quality of data set(?), noise (?), missing data (?)

Page 10: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

2. Nomogram core(PM):• Modeling tools:

• machine learning: neuronal nets, machine vector, induction graph, bayesian

• statistic : regression, Cox model• symbolic learning, rules induction

Validation:internal:

learning set-test setbootstrap, jackknife

external:academic/non-academic centerspublication bias (negatives) «invalidating nomogram»

What “nomogram” to choose?(nomogram specifications)

Page 11: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

• Simplest possible• Linked to an actionable question• Modeling: statistics, significativity of the features• Good performance in prediction:

• Accuracy (validation in similar sample data)• Calibration • Discrimination: Harell c index or AUC ∈(0.7-0.8*)

• Generalizability• Updating models using my own data (e.g. using

bayesian technics and bootstrap)• Estimation by confidence interval

What “nomogram” I use?

c index >0.8 : memorized data? over-learning?

Page 12: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

How to use predictive nomograms

• is difficult to use it as well!• after validation in your data or in identical

sample• using à confidence interval, and if possible

built-in on your data• we should dispose official recommendation

(E.A.U., A.F.U.)• for patients to be informed BY doctors• permanent updated with new data:

• new patients• new features: genomic and biomolecular data 1

2

12

Page 13: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

«no nomogram will ever take the place of good clinical judgement and the well-informed patients.»

Robert W. Ross, Philip W. KantoffPredicting Outcomes in Prostate Cancer: How Many More Nomograms Do

Se Nedd? J.CLIN.ONCOL, 25,2077:3563-3564

13

13

Page 14: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

Thanks to:• Pr Laurent Boccon-Gibod, Bichat Hospital

• Pr Jean-Hugues Chauchat, Knowledge engineering Labs,

(PhD Thesis Director)

The presentation it has been inspired by papers• Michael W.Kattan

• Philip W. Kantoff

• Frank E.Harell

• Rodolfo Montironi

• Robert W. Ross

• Peter T. Scardino

• Ashutosh Tewari

• Blaz Zupan

and many others 14

14

Page 15: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

Case Nr 150y old, caucasian, Website designer

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with LUTS : AUA-SI = 8 (moderate)

Erectile dysfunction (ED), IIEF15 (Erectile Function-domain)=7 (severe)

PSA=8 ng/ml, DRE=T1c

Transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate:

prostate volume=30;

Gleason score= 4+5;

3 positives cores on 12.

The patient says: «Using internet I found that the probability to be healed 5 years latter as 87% in the case of the surgery, and only about 73% in the case of the external beam radiation therapy. I choose the surgery!»

15

15

Page 16: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

Case nr 1

As urologist in a non academic center do you

operate him?

How to explain the difference?

What confidence around the estimate?

Progression Free Probability Radical

Prostatectomy meant «Healed»?

rising PSA after surgery= after radiation therapy

16

16

50y, Gleason score= 4+5, PSA= 8 ng/ml,T1c

Page 17: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

Case Nr 265y old, caucasian, statistician

Hemochromatosis

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with LUTS : AUA-SI = 20 (severe)

Erectile dysfunction (ED), IIEF15 (Erectile Function-domain)=26 (mild)

PSA=30 ng/ml, DRE=T1c

2 previously biopsy of prostate= negatives

Transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate:

prostate volume= 65 cc

Gleason score= 3+3;

6 positives cores on 12.

17

17

Page 18: Nomograms why when what Congres CURy 2009

[email protected]

Case Nr 2As urologist in a non academic center you explain that in the case of

the prostatectomy the 5 years progression free probability is 93%, and only about 72% in the case of the external beam radiation therapy.

The patient (statistician) ask you: «But if YOU are the surgeon, what are the estimation of the same progression free probability?»

You have no Idea about it!

93% as the nomogram predict, because the nomogram has

been validated

93% ± 5% (α, risque of error)

around 93%

18

18