Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28618771›Full record

ArticleUltrasonography (Seoul, Korea)2018

Logistic LASSO regression for the diagnosis of breast cancer using clinical demographic data and the BI-RADS lexicon for ultrasonography.

Sun Mi Kim, Yongdai Kim, Kuhwan Jeong, Heeyeong Jeong, Jiyoung Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. A radiomics nomogram for the prediction of overall survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatectomy.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2020
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Developing a resiliency model for survival without major morbidity in preterm infants.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Sun Mi KimDepartment of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University, Seongnam, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-0899-3580
Yongdai KimDepartment of Statistics, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-9434-5645
Kuhwan JeongDepartment of Statistics, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-4645-2339
Heeyeong JeongDepartment of Health Promotion, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-6128-7020
Jiyoung KimDepartment of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University, Seongnam, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-1466-2112

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this study was to compare the performance of image analysis for predicting breast cancer using two distinct regression models and to evaluate the usefulness of incorporating clinical and demographic data (CDD) into the image analysis in order to improve the diagnosis of breast cancer.

methodsThis study included 139 solid masses from 139 patients who underwent a ultrasonography-guided core biopsy and had available CDD between June 2009 and April 2010. Three breast radiologists retrospectively reviewed 139 breast masses and described each lesion using the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) lexicon. We applied and compared two regression methods-stepwise logistic (SL) regression and logistic least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression-in which the BI-RADS descriptors and CDD were used as covariates. We investigated the performances of these regression methods and the agreement of radiologists in terms of test misclassification error and the area under the curve (AUC) of the tests.

resultsLogistic LASSO regression was superior (P<0.05) to SL regression, regardless of whether CDD was included in the covariates, in terms of test misclassification errors (0.234 vs. 0.253, without CDD; 0.196 vs. 0.258, with CDD) and AUC (0.785 vs. 0.759, without CDD; 0.873 vs. 0.735, with CDD). However, it was inferior (P<0.05) to the agreement of three radiologists in terms of test misclassification errors (0.234 vs. 0.168, without CDD; 0.196 vs. 0.088, with CDD) and the AUC without CDD (0.785 vs. 0.844, P<0.001), but was comparable to the AUC with CDD (0.873 vs. 0.880, P=0.141).

conclusionLogistic LASSO regression based on BI-RADS descriptors and CDD showed better performance than SL in predicting the presence of breast cancer. The use of CDD as a supplement to the BI-RADS descriptors significantly improved the prediction of breast cancer using logistic LASSO regression.

Indexed as

BreastBreast neoplasmsDiagnosisLogistic modelsUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID28618771
PMCPMC5769953

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.