Search

In population pharmacokinetic (PK) models, interindividual variability is explained by implementation of covariates in the model. The widely used forward stepwise selection method is sensitive to bias, which may lead to an incorrect inclusion of covariates. Alternatives, such as the full fixed effects model, reduce this bias but are dependent on the chosen implementation of each covariate. As the correct functional forms are unknown, this may still lead to an inaccurate selection of covariates. Machine learning (ML) techniques can potentially be used to learn the optimal functional forms for implementing covariates directly from data. A recent study suggested that using ML resulted in an improved selection of influential covariates. However, how do we select the appropriate functional form for including these covariates? In this work, we use SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) to infer the relationship between covariates and PK parameters from ML models. As a case‐study, we use data from 119 patients with hemophilia A receiving clotting factor VIII concentrate peri‐operatively. We fit both a random forest and a XGBoost model to predict empirical Bayes estimated clearance and central volume from a base nonlinear mixed effects model. Next, we show that SHAP reveals covariate relationships which match previous findings. In addition, we can reveal subtle effects arising from combinations of covariates difficult to obtain using other methods of covariate analysis. We conclude that the proposed method can be used to extend ML‐based covariate selection, and holds potential as a complete full model alternative to classical covariate analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Machine learning has the potential to improve the positive predictive value of neonatal screening for primary and central congenital hypothyroidism. • Currently, detection of central congenital hypothyroidism is accompanied by a high number of false-positives. • In order of importance, variables determining detection of congenital hypothyroidism were TSH, T4/TBG, (gestational) age, TBG, T4, and age at NBS sampling. • From the current routine screening parameters, T4/TBG is the most important parameter to detect central congenital hypothyroidism with a low positive predictive value. • New screening parameters are needed to improve the detection of central congenital hypothyroidism. The Dutch Congenital hypothyroidism (CH) Newborn Screening (NBS) algorithm for thyroidal and central congenital hypothyroidism (CH-T and CH-C, respectively) is primarily based on determination of thyroxine (T4) concentrations in dried blood spots, followed by thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) and thyroxine-binding globulin (TBG) measurements enabling detection of both CH-T and CH-C, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 21%. A calculated T4/TBG ratio serves as an indirect measure for free T4. The aim of this study is to investigate whether machine learning techniques can help to improve the PPV of the algorithm without missing the positive cases that should have been detected with the current algorithm. NBS data and parameters of CH patients and false-positive referrals in the period 2007–2017 and of a healthy reference population were included in the study. A random forest model was trained and tested using a stratified split and improved using synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE). NBS data of 4668 newborns were included, containing 458 CH-T and 82 CH-C patients, 2332 false-positive referrals and 1670 healthy newborns. Variables determining identification of CH were (in order of importance) TSH, T4/TBG ratio, gestational age, TBG, T4 and age at NBS sampling. In a Receiver-Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis on the test set, current sensitivity could be maintained, while increasing the PPV to 26%. Machine learning techniques have the potential to improve the PPV of the Dutch CH NBS. However, improved detection of currently missed cases is only possible with new, better predictors of especially CH-C and a better registration and inclusion of these cases in future models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The goals of this study were to examine whether machine-learning algorithms outperform multivariable logistic regression in the prediction of insufficient response to methotrexate (MTX); secondly, to examine which features are essential for correct prediction; and finally, to investigate whether the best performing model specifically identifies insufficient responders to MTX (combination) therapy. The prediction of insufficient response (3-month Disease Activity Score 28-Erythrocyte-sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) > 3.2) was assessed using logistic regression, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), random forest, and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost). The baseline features of 355 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients from the "treatment in the Rotterdam Early Arthritis CoHort" (tREACH) and the U-Act-Early trial were combined for analyses. The model performances were compared using area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), and sensitivity and specificity. Finally, the best performing model following feature selection was tested on 101 RA patients starting tocilizumab (TCZ)-monotherapy. Logistic regression (AUC = 0.77 95% CI: 0.68–0.86) performed as well as LASSO (AUC = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.67–0.85), random forest (AUC = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.61 = 0.81), and XGBoost (AUC = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.61–0.81), yet logistic regression reached the highest sensitivity (81%). The most important features were baseline DAS28 (components). For all algorithms, models with six features performed similarly to those with 16. When applied to the TCZ-monotherapy group, logistic regression's sensitivity significantly dropped from 83% to 69% (p = 0.03). In the current dataset, logistic regression performed equally well compared to machine-learning algorithms in the prediction of insufficient response to MTX. Models could be reduced to six features, which are more conducive for clinical implementation. Interestingly, the prediction model was specific to MTX (combination) therapy response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]