Interpretable Machine Learning Classifiers for Brain Tumour Survival
  Prediction
  Prediction of survival in patients diagnosed with a brain tumour is
challenging because of heterogeneous tumour behaviours and responses to
treatment. Better estimations of prognosis would support treatment planning and
patient support. Advances in machine learning have informed development of
clinical predictive models, but their integration into clinical practice is
almost non-existent. One reasons for this is the lack of interpretability of
models. In this paper, we use a novel brain tumour dataset to compare two
interpretable rule list models against popular machine learning approaches for
brain tumour survival prediction. All models are quantitatively evaluated using
standard performance metrics. The rule lists are also qualitatively assessed
for their interpretability and clinical utility. The interpretability of the
black box machine learning models is evaluated using two post-hoc explanation
techniques, LIME and SHAP. Our results show that the rule lists were only
slightly outperformed by the black box models. We demonstrate that rule list
algorithms produced simple decision lists that align with clinical expertise.
By comparison, post-hoc interpretability methods applied to black box models
may produce unreliable explanations of local model predictions. Model
interpretability is essential for understanding differences in predictive
performance and for integration into clinical practice.
