Investigator

Rob L. Dood

Trainee · University of Pennsylvania

RLDRob L. Dood
Papers(2)
Training, Validating,…Mortality Patterns of…
Collaborators(10)
Stephen B. EdgeVincent WagnerAhmad A. TarhiniAndrew PolioBodour SalhiaBradley R. CorrBritton TrabertCasey M. CosgroveChelsey VranesErin George
Institutions(8)
Huntsman Cancer Insti…Roswell Park Comprehe…University of IowaMoffitt Cancer CenterUniversity Of Souther…University Of Colorad…The Ohio State Univer…University Of Utah

Papers

Training, Validating, and Testing Machine Learning Prediction Models for Endometrial Cancer Recurrence

PURPOSE Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynecologic cancer in the United States with rising incidence and mortality. Despite optimal treatment, 15%-20% of all patients will recur. To better select patients for adjuvant therapy, it is important to accurately predict patients at risk for recurrence. Our objective was to train, validate, and test models of EC recurrence using lasso regression and other machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) analytics in a large, comprehensive data set. METHODS Data from patients with EC were downloaded from the Oncology Research Information Exchange Network database and stratified into low risk, The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) grade 1 and 2, stage I (N = 329); high risk, or FIGO grade 3 or stages II, III, IV (N = 324); and nonendometrioid histology (N = 239) groups. Clinical, pathologic, genomic, and genetic data were used for the analysis. Genomic data included microRNA, long noncoding RNA, isoforms, and pseudogene expressions. Genetic variation included single-nucleotide variation (SNV) and copy-number variation (CNV). In the discovery phase, we selected variables informative for recurrence ( P < .05), using univariate analyses of variance. Then, we trained, validated, and tested multivariate models using selected variables and lasso regression, MATLAB (ML), and TensorFlow (DL). RESULTS Recurrence clinic models for low-risk, high-risk, and high-risk nonendometrioid histology had AUCs of 56%, 70%, and 65%, respectively. For training, we selected models with AUC >80%: five for the low-risk group, 20 models for the high-risk group, and 20 for the nonendometrioid group. The two best low-risk models included clinical data and CNVs. For the high-risk group, three of the five best-performing models included pseudogene expression. For the nonendometrioid group, pseudogene expression and SNV were overrepresented in the best models. CONCLUSION Prediction models of EC recurrence built with ML and DL analytics had better performance than models with clinical and pathologic data alone. Prospective validation is required to determine clinical utility.

Mortality Patterns of Synchronous Uterine and Ovarian Cancers: A SEER Registry Analysis

Abstract Background: The degree to which uterine cancer metastatic to the ovary is misdiagnosed as synchronous stage I uterine and ovarian cancers is unclear. We sought to determine whether patients with synchronous cancers had mortality patterns similar to either stage IIIA uterine, stage I uterine, or stage I ovarian cancers alone. Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was used to compare mortality of patients with synchronous stage I uterine and stage I ovarian cancers versus those with stage IIIA uterine, stage I uterine, or stage I ovarian cancers alone. We calculated age-adjusted mortality hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) accounting for calendar year and grade, adjuvant treatment, grade 1 endometrioid cancers, grade 3 endometrioid cancers, and stage IA cancers. Results: Among the 9,321 patients, we observed lower age-adjusted mortality in patients with stage I synchronous cancers (n = 937) compared to those with stage IIIA uterine (n = 531; HR, 0.45 95% CI, 0.35–0.58), stage I uterine (n = 6,919; HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.60–0.91), and stage I ovarian cancers (n = 934; HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.41–0.67). Results were similar after taking into account diagnosis year and grade, and limiting to those receiving adjuvant therapy, grade 1 or grade 3 endometrioid cancers, or stage IA cancers. Conclusions: We observed lower mortality for synchronous stage I uterine and ovarian cancers, which was not explained by younger age, earlier stage, lower grade, histology type, or adjuvant therapy. Impact: The possible misdiagnosis associated with clinicopathologic of synchronous uterine and ovarian cancers does not appear to worsen survival on a population level.

20Works
2Papers
15Collaborators

Positions

Trainee

University of Pennsylvania

2020–

Assistant Professor

Huntsman Cancer Institute - University of Utah · Obstetrics and Gynecology

2016–

Fellow

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine

Links & IDs
0000-0003-4302-6983

Scopus: 57194541366