Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 22, 2025

Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
Published on: September 27, 2024
Comparing Clinician Estimates versus a Statistical Tool for Predicting Risk of Death within 45 Days of Admission for
Adrianna Z Herskovits1, Tiffanny Newman2, Kevin Nicholas2
1Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States.
Objectives:
While clinical practice guidelines recommend that oncologists discuss goals of care with patients who have advanced cancer, it is estimated that less than 20% of individuals admitted to the hospital with high-risk cancers have end-of-life discussions with their providers. While there has been interest in developing models for mortality prediction to trigger such discussions, few studies have compared how such models compare with clinical judgment to determine a patient's mortality risk.
Methods:
This study is a prospective analysis of 1,069 solid tumor medical oncology hospital admissions (n = 911 unique patients) from February 7 to June 7, 2022, at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Electronic surveys were sent to hospitalists, advanced practice providers, and medical oncologists the first afternoon following a hospital admission and they were asked to estimate the probability that the patient would die within 45 days. Provider estimates of mortality were compared with those from a predictive model developed using a supervised machine learning methodology, and incorporated routine laboratory, demographic, biometric, and admission data. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration and decision curves were compared between clinician estimates and the model predictions.
Results:
Within 45 days following hospital admission, 229 (25%) of 911 patients died. The model performed better than the clinician estimates (AUC 0.834 vs. 0.753, p < 0.0001). Integrating clinician predictions with the model's estimates further increased the AUC to 0.853 (p < 0.0001). Clinicians overestimated risk whereas the model was extremely well-calibrated. The model demonstrated net benefit over a wide range of threshold probabilities.
Conclusion:
The inpatient prognosis at admission model is a robust tool to assist clinical providers in evaluating mortality risk, and it has recently been implemented in the electronic medical record at our institution to improve end-of-life care planning for hospitalized cancer patients.
Related Concept Videos
Cancer Survival Analysis
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Kaplan-Meier Approach
Actuarial Approach
Consider the example of a high-risk surgical procedure with significant early-stage mortality. A two-year clinical study is conducted,...
Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data
The Mantel-Cox Log-Rank Test

