Prediction models for chronic postsurgical pain in patients with breast cancer based on machine learning approaches

Harnessing artificial intelligence for predicting and managing postoperative pain: a narrative literature review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review examines recent research on artificial intelligence focusing on machine learning (ML) models for predicting postoperative pain outcomes. We also identify technical, ethical, and practical hurdles that demand continued investigation and research.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current ML models leverage diverse datasets, algorithmic techniques, and validation methods to identify predictive biomarkers, risk factors, and phenotypic signatures associated with increased acute and chronic postoperative pain and persistent opioid use. ML models demonstrate satisfactory performance to predict pain outcomes and their prognostic trajectories, identify modifiable risk factors and at-risk patients who benefit from targeted pain management strategies, and show promise in pain prevention applications. However, further evidence is needed to evaluate the reliability, generalizability, effectiveness, and safety of ML-driven approaches before their integration into perioperative pain management practices.

SUMMARY

Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to enhance perioperative pain management by providing more accurate predictive models and personalized interventions. By leveraging ML algorithms, clinicians can better identify at-risk patients and tailor treatment strategies accordingly. However, successful implementation needs to address challenges in data quality, algorithmic complexity, and ethical and practical considerations. Future research should focus on validating AI-driven interventions in clinical practice and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration to advance perioperative care.

Machine Learning Approaches to Predict Symptoms in People With Cancer: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

People with cancer frequently experience severe and distressing symptoms associated with cancer and its treatments. Predicting symptoms in patients with cancer continues to be a significant challenge for both clinicians and researchers. The rapid evolution of machine learning (ML) highlights the need for a current systematic review to improve cancer symptom prediction.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aims to synthesize the literature that has used ML algorithms to predict the development of cancer symptoms and to identify the predictors of these symptoms. This is essential for integrating new developments and identifying gaps in existing literature.

METHODS

We conducted this systematic review in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) checklist. We conducted a systematic search of CINAHL, Embase, and PubMed for English records published from 1984 to August 11, 2023, using the following search terms: cancer, neoplasm, specific symptoms, neural networks, machine learning, specific algorithm names, and deep learning. All records that met the eligibility criteria were individually reviewed by 2 coauthors, and key findings were extracted and synthesized. We focused on studies using ML algorithms to predict cancer symptoms, excluding nonhuman research, technical reports, reviews, book chapters, conference proceedings, and inaccessible full texts.

RESULTS

A total of 42 studies were included, the majority of which were published after 2017. Most studies were conducted in North America (18/42, 43%) and Asia (16/42, 38%). The sample sizes in most studies (27/42, 64%) typically ranged from 100 to 1000 participants. The most prevalent category of algorithms was supervised ML, accounting for 39 (93%) of the 42 studies. Each of the methods-deep learning, ensemble classifiers, and unsupervised ML-constituted 3 (3%) of the 42 studies. The ML algorithms with the best performance were logistic regression (9/42, 17%), random forest (7/42, 13%), artificial neural networks (5/42, 9%), and decision trees (5/42, 9%). The most commonly included primary cancer sites were the head and neck (9/42, 22%) and breast (8/42, 19%), with 17 (41%) of the 42 studies not specifying the site. The most frequently studied symptoms were xerostomia (9/42, 14%), depression (8/42, 13%), pain (8/42, 13%), and fatigue (6/42, 10%). The significant predictors were age, gender, treatment type, treatment number, cancer site, cancer stage, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, chronic diseases, comorbidities, physical factors, and psychological factors.

CONCLUSIONS

This review outlines the algorithms used for predicting symptoms in individuals with cancer. Given the diversity of symptoms people with cancer experience, analytic approaches that can handle complex and nonlinear relationships are critical. This knowledge can pave the way for crafting algorithms tailored to a specific symptom. In addition, to improve prediction precision, future research should compare cutting-edge ML strategies such as deep learning and ensemble methods with traditional statistical models.

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Cancer Related Pain: A Systematic Review

Background/objective

Pain is a challenging multifaceted symptom reported by most cancer patients, resulting in a substantial burden on both patients and healthcare systems. This systematic review aims to explore applications of artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML) in predicting pain-related outcomes and supporting decision-making processes in pain management in cancer.

Methods

A comprehensive search of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science databases was conducted using terms including "Cancer", "Pain", "Pain Management", "Analgesics", "Opioids", "Artificial Intelligence", "Machine Learning", "Deep Learning", and "Neural Networks" published up to September 7, 2023. The screening process was performed using the Covidence screening tool. Only original studies conducted in human cohorts were included. AI/ML models, their validation and performance and adherence to TRIPOD guidelines were summarized from the final included studies.

Results

This systematic review included 44 studies from 2006-2023. Most studies were prospective and uni-institutional. There was an increase in the trend of AI/ML studies in cancer pain in the last 4 years. Nineteen studies used AI/ML for classifying cancer patients' pain development after cancer therapy, with median AUC 0.80 (range 0.76-0.94). Eighteen studies focused on cancer pain research with median AUC 0.86 (range 0.50-0.99), and 7 focused on applying AI/ML for cancer pain management decisions with median AUC 0.71 (range 0.47-0.89). Multiple ML models were investigated with. median AUC across all models in all studies (0.77). Random forest models demonstrated the highest performance (median AUC 0.81), lasso models had the highest median sensitivity (1), while Support Vector Machine had the highest median specificity (0.74). Overall adherence of included studies to TRIPOD guidelines was 70.7%. Lack of external validation (14%) and clinical application (23%) of most included studies was detected. Reporting of model calibration was also missing in the majority of studies (5%).

Conclusion

Implementation of various novel AI/ML tools promises significant advances in the classification, risk stratification, and management decisions for cancer pain. These advanced tools will integrate big health-related data for personalized pain management in cancer patients. Further research focusing on model calibration and rigorous external clinical validation in real healthcare settings is imperative for ensuring its practical and reliable application in clinical practice.

Mechanisms inherent in acute-to-chronic pain after surgery - risk, diagnostic, predictive, and prognostic factors

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Pain is an expected consequence of a surgery, but it is far from being well controlled. One major complication of acute pain is its risk of persistency beyond healing. This so-called chronic post-surgical pain (CPSP) is defined as new or increased pain due to surgery that lasts for at least 3 months after surgery. CPSP is frequent, underlies a complex bio-psycho-social process and constitutes an important socioeconomic challenge with significant impact on patients' quality of life. Its importance has been recognized by its inclusion in the eleventh version of the ICD (International Classification of Diseases).

RECENT FINDINGS

Evidence for most pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions preventing CPSP is inconsistent. Identification of associated patient-related factors, such as psychosocial aspects, comorbidities, surgical factors, pain trajectories, or biomarkers may allow stratification and selection of treatment options based on underlying individual mechanisms. Consequently, the identification of patients at risk and implementation of individually tailored, preventive, multimodal treatment to reduce the risk of transition from acute to chronic pain is facilitated.

SUMMARY

This review will give an update on current knowledge on mechanism-based risk, prognostic and predictive factors for CPSP in adults, and preventive and therapeutic approaches, and how to use them for patient stratification in the future.

Prognostic models for chronic postsurgical pain-Current developments, trends, and challenges

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Prognostic models for chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) aim to predict the likelihood for development and severity of CPSP in individual patients undergoing surgical procedures. Such models might provide valuable information for healthcare providers, allowing them to identify patients at higher risk and implement targeted interventions to prevent or manage CPSP effectively. This review discusses the latest developments of prognostic models for CPSP, their challenges, limitations, and future directions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Numerous studies have been conducted aiming to develop prognostic models for CPSP using various perioperative factors. These include patient-related factors like demographic variables, preexisting pain conditions, psychosocial aspects, procedure-specific characteristics, perioperative analgesic strategies, postoperative complications and, as indicated most recently, biomarkers. Model generation, however, varies and performance and accuracy differ between prognostic models for several reasons and validation of models is rather scarce.

SUMMARY

Precise methodology of prognostic model development needs advancements in the field of CPSP. Development of more accurate, validated and refined models in large-scale cohorts is needed to improve reliability and applicability in clinical practice and validation studies are necessary to further refine and improve the performance of prognostic models for CPSP.