IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0334858.html

Machine learning detects hidden treatment response patterns only in the presence of comprehensive clinical phenotyping

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen D Auger
  • Gregory Scott

Abstract

Inferential statistics traditionally used in clinical trials can miss relationships between clinical phenotypes and treatment responses. We simulated a randomised clinical trial to explore how gradient boosting (XGBoost) machine learning compares with traditional analysis when ‘ground truth’ treatment responsiveness depends on the interaction of multiple phenotypic variables. As expected, traditional analysis detected a significant treatment benefit (outcome measure change from baseline = 4.23; 95% CI 3.64–4.82). However, recommending treatment based upon this evidence would lead to 56.3% of patients failing to respond. In contrast, machine learning correctly predicted treatment response in 97.8% (95% CI 96.6–99.1) of patients, with model interrogation showing the critical phenotypic variables and the values determining treatment response had been identified. Importantly, when a single variable was omitted, accuracy dropped to 69.4% (95% CI 65.3–73.4). This proof of principle underscores the significant potential of machine learning to maximise the insights derived from clinical research studies. However, the effectiveness of machine learning in this context is highly dependent on the comprehensive capture of phenotypic data.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen D Auger & Gregory Scott, 2025. "Machine learning detects hidden treatment response patterns only in the presence of comprehensive clinical phenotyping," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(10), pages 1-19, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0334858
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0334858
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0334858
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0334858&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0334858?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0334858. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.