Research Article

Prediction of Renal Cell Carcinoma Based on Ensemble Learning Methods

Volume: 7 Number: 1 April 30, 2021
EN TR

Prediction of Renal Cell Carcinoma Based on Ensemble Learning Methods

Abstract

Objective: In recent years, ensemble learning methods have gained widespread use for early diagnosis of cancer diseases. In this study, it is aimed to establish a high-performance ensemble learning model for early diagnosis and classification of renal cell carcinomas.
Methods: In the study, hemogram and laboratory data of 140 patients with renal cell carcinoma and 140 patients without renal cell carcinoma were included in the study. The data set includes 27 predictors and 1 dependent variable. The data were obtained retrospectively. In the study, classification performances of machine learning methods and ensemble learning methods were compared. In the study, classification performances of boosting, bagging, voting and stacking ensemble learning methods as well as IB1, IBk, Kstar, LWL, REPTree, Random Forest and SMO classifiers were compared.
Results: REPTree classifier provided the highest performance among machine learning methods (Accuracy = 0.867). Among the ensemble learning methods, the Stacking ensemble learning method provided the highest performance in Model 6 (Accuracy = 0.906). Stacking ensemble learning methods performed higher than boosting, voting, bagging ensemble methods and machine learning methods.
Conclusion: Stacking ensemble learning methods provide successful results in the early diagnosis of renal cell carcinomas. Stacking ensemble learning methods can be used as an alternative to existing methods for diagnosing renal cell carcinoma. In order to further increase the classification performance of the stacking ensemble learning method, it is recommended to choose a meta classifier suitable for the data set and variable types.

Keywords

Ensemble Learning Methods , Meta Classifier , Renal Cell Carcinoma , Early Diagnosis

References

  1. 1. Gucer H. The relationship between cox-2 expression, microvessel density and various clinicopatologic parameters in clear cell type renal cell carcinoma. Thesis of Specialization in Medicine. Istanbul: Taksim Educational and Research. 2006.
  2. 2. Demirkıran ED. The relationship between tumor volume kidney volume ratio and prognostic factors in renal cell carcinoma. Thesis of Specialization in Medicine. Zonguldak: Bulent Ecevit University, Faculty of Medicine. 2019.
  3. 3. Capitanio U, Bensalah K, Bex A, Boorjian SA, Bray F, Coleman J, et al. Epidemiology of renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 2019 Jan 1;75(1):74-84.
  4. 4. Kim HL, Belldegrun AS, Freitas DG, Bui MH, Han KR, Dorey FJ, et al. Paraneoplastic signs and symptoms of renal cell carcinoma: implications for prognosis. J Urol 2003 Nov;170(5):1742-6.
  5. 5. Ficarra V, Prayer-Galetti T, Novella G, Bratti E, Maffei N, Dal Bianco M, et al. Incidental detection beyond pathological factors as prognostic predictor of renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 2003 Jun 1;43(6):663-9.
  6. 6. Tastekin E. The comparison of angiogenetic and prognostic factors in renal cell carcinomas. Thesis of Specialization in Medicine. Edirne: Trakya University Faculty of Medicine. 2019.
  7. 7. Eble JN, Togashi K, Pisani P. Renal Cell Carcinoma. In : Eble JN, Sauter G, Epstein JI, Sesterhenn IA. editors. World Health Organization Classification of Tumours. Pathology and genetics of Tumours of the urinary system and male genital organs IARC Press, 2004: 9-87.
  8. 8. Akman M, Genc Y, Ankarali H. Random Forests Methods and an Application in Health Science. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal Biostat 2011;3: 36-48.
  9. 9. Pesch B, Haerting J, Ranft U, Klimpel A, Oelschlägel B, Schill W. Occupational risk factors for renal cell carcinoma: agent-specific results from a case-control study in Germany. Int. J. Epidemiol 2000 Dec 1;29(6):1014-24.
  10. 10. Dietterich T. Overfitting and undercomputing in machine learning. ACM Comput Surv 1995 Sep 1;27(3):326-7.