Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Sep 4;33(9):1383-1393.
doi: 10.1136/ijgc-2023-004622.

Evaluating the use of machine learning in endometrial cancer: a systematic review

Affiliations
Free article

Evaluating the use of machine learning in endometrial cancer: a systematic review

Sabrina Piedimonte et al. Int J Gynecol Cancer. .
Free article

Abstract

Objective: To review the literature on machine learning in endometrial cancer, report the most commonly used algorithms, and compare performance with traditional prediction models.

Methods: This is a systematic review of the literature from January 1985 to March 2021 on the use of machine learning in endometrial cancer. An extensive search of electronic databases was conducted. Four independent reviewers screened studies initially by title then full text. Quality was assessed using the MINORS (Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies) criteria. P values were derived using the Pearson's Χ2 test in JMP 15.0.

Results: Among 4295 articles screened, 30 studies on machine learning in endometrial cancer were included. The most frequent applications were in patient datasets (33.3%, n=10), pre-operative diagnostics (30%, n=9), genomics (23.3%, n=7), and serum biomarkers (13.3%, n=4). The most commonly used models were neural networks (n=10, 33.3%) and support vector machine (n=6, 20%).The number of publications on machine learning in endometrial cancer increased from 1 in 2010 to 29 in 2021.Eight studies compared machine learning with traditional statistics. Among patient dataset studies, two machine learning models (20%) performed similarly to logistic regression (accuracy: 0.85 vs 0.82, p=0.16). Machine learning algorithms performed similarly to detect endometrial cancer based on MRI (accuracy: 0.87 vs 0.82, p=0.24) while outperforming traditional methods in predicting extra-uterine disease in one serum biomarker study (accuracy: 0.81 vs 0.61). For survival outcomes, one study compared machine learning with Kaplan-Meier and reported no difference in concordance index (83.8% vs 83.1%).

Conclusion: Although machine learning is an innovative and emerging technology, performance is similar to that of traditional regression models in endometrial cancer. More studies are needed to assess its role in endometrial cancer.

Prospero registration number: CRD42021269565.

Keywords: Endometrial Neoplasms.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources