Bayesian Hierarchical Modeling Framework for Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Prediction: Integrating Clinical, Pathological, And Treatment Variables

References

[1] Austin, P. C., Merlo, J., & Ghali, W. A. (2018). To multilevel or not to multilevel: when to use multilevel modeling in health services research. Health Services Research, 53(4), 2531-2550.

[2] Banerjee, S., Carlin, B. P., & Gelfand, A. E. (2015). Hierarchical modeling and analysis for spatial data. CRC Press.

[3] Berger, J. O. (2020). The case for objective Bayesian analysis. Bayesian Analysis, 15(3), 859-899.

[4] Bray, F., Laversanne, M., Sung, H., Ferlay, J., Siegel, R. L., Soerjomataram, I., & Jemal, A. (2024). Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 74(3), 229-263.

[5] Collins, G. S., Dhiman, P., Andaur Navarro, C. L., Ma, J., Hooft, L., Reitsma, J. B., & Moons, K. G. M. (2021). Protocol for development of a reporting guideline (TRIPOD-AI) and risk of bias tool (PROBAST-AI) for diagnostic and prognostic prediction model studies based on artificial intelligence. BMJ Open, 11(7), e048008.

[6] Cruz-Ramírez, N., Acosta-Mesa, H. G., Carrillo-Calvet, H., Alonso Nava-Fernández, L., & Barrientos-Martínez, R. E. (2013). Diagnosis of breast cancer using Bayesian networks: A case study. Computers in Biology and Medicine, 37(11), 1553-1564.

[7] Debray, T. P., Moons, K. G., Ahmed, I., Koffijberg, H., & Riley, R. D. (2017). A framework for developing, implementing, and evaluating clinical prediction models in an era of big data. BMC Medicine, 15, 155.

[8] Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., Dunson, D. B., Vehtari, A., & Rubin, D. B. (2013). Bayesian data analysis (3rd ed.). CRC Press.

[9] Goldstein, H. (2011). Multilevel statistical models. John Wiley and Sons.

[10] Newman, L. A., Kaljee, L. M., Mathews, A., Jandorf, L., Ademuyiwa, F. O., & Bondy, M. L. (2019). Breast cancer disparities in African women living in sub-Saharan Africa or the United States. Cancer, 125(24), 4456-4463.

[11] Park, T., & Casella, G. (2008). The Bayesian Lasso. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 103(482), 681-686.

[12] Sidey-Gibbons, J. A. M., & Sidey-Gibbons, C. J. (2019). Machine learning in medicine: a practical introduction. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 19, 64.

[13] Spiegelhalter, D. J. (2019). The art of statistics: How to learn from data. Basic Books.

[14] Sung, H., Ferlay, J., Siegel, R. L., Laversanne, M., Soerjomataram, I., Jemal, A., & Bray, F. (2021). Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 71(3), 209-249.

[15] Wessels, L. F., & van de Vijver, M. J. (2022). External validation of breast cancer prediction models: a systematic review. Breast Cancer Research, 24, 83.

@article{1709507,
      author = {Muhati Nelson Lwoyelo, Richard Simwa, Vincent Marani},
      title = {Bayesian Hierarchical Modeling Framework for Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Prediction: Integrating Clinical, Pathological, And Treatment Variables},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2025},
      volume = {9},
      number = {1},
      pages = {237-242},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1709507.pdf},
      abstract = {Breast cancer represents the most prevalent malignancy among women globally, with approximately 2.3 million new cases annually. In Kenya, it disproportionately affects younger women (35-50 years) and represents the leading cancer diagnosis. Current prediction models inadequately quantify uncertainty in treatment responses, leading to suboptimal clinical decision-making. This study developed a Bayesian hierarchical modeling framework to predict pathological complete response (pCR) in breast cancer patients by systematically integrating clinical, pathological, and treatment variables. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 5,400 patients across 12 Kenyan treatment centers using Bayesian logistic regression with random effects to model hierarchical data structure. The framework incorporated tumor stage, molecular markers (hormone receptor status, HER2), histological grade, patient demographics, and treatment protocols. Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods estimated posterior distributions with multiple imputation addressing missing data. The developed model demonstrated superior predictive accuracy (AUC = 0.837) compared to classical approaches, with significant effects identified for tumor stage (Stage IV OR: 3.19, 95% CrI: 1.89-4.54), hormone receptor status (OR: 0.31, 95% CrI: 0.15-0.66), and HER2 positivity (OR: 2.33, 95% CrI: 1.08-4.78). Treatment center heterogeneity accounted for 12.5% of outcome variability. This framework provides the first population-specific Bayesian approach for sub-Saharan African breast cancer prediction, enabling personalized treatment planning and improved clinical decision-making in resource-constrained settings.},
      keywords = {Bayesian Hierarchical Modeling, Breast Cancer, Treatment Outcome Prediction, Pathological Complete Response},
      month = {July},
  }