Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30328048›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2019

Multivariate machine learning models for prediction of pathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer using MRI features: a study using an independent validation set.

Elizabeth Hope Cain, Ashirbani Saha, Michael R Harowicz, Jeffrey R Marks, P Kelly Marcom, Maciej A Mazurowski

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 95 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
95citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

95 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Pretreatment MRI radiomics for predicting pathological Miller-Payne grading in breast cancer following neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

35 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Elizabeth Hope CainDepartment of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, 2301 Erwin Road, Durham, NC, 27705, USA. Elizabeth.cain@duke.edu.
Ashirbani SahaDepartment of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, 2301 Erwin Road, Durham, NC, 27705, USA.
Michael R HarowiczDepartment of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, 2301 Erwin Road, Durham, NC, 27705, USA.
Jeffrey R MarksDepartment of Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, 2301 Erwin Road, Durham, NC, 27705, USA.
P Kelly MarcomDepartment of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, 2301 Erwin Road, Durham, NC, 27705, USA.
Maciej A MazurowskiDepartment of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, 2301 Erwin Road, Durham, NC, 27705, USA.

Funding

Breast Cancer Detection ConsortiumU01CA214183 · NCI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI MARKS, JEFFREY R., TANG, CHA-MEI · 2016 to 2021
$2.4M
Machine learning and collaborative filtering tools for personalized education in digital breast tomosynthesisR01EB021360 · NIBIB · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI MAZUROWSKI, MACIEJ A. · 2016 to 2019
$1.6M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA214183NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB021360NIH HHS 1R01EB021360North Carolina Biotechnology Center 2016-BIG-6520
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo determine whether a multivariate machine learning-based model using computer-extracted features of pre-treatment dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) can predict pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in breast cancer patients.

methodsInstitutional review board approval was obtained for this retrospective study of 288 breast cancer patients at our institution who received NAT and had a pre-treatment breast MRI. A comprehensive set of 529 radiomic features was extracted from each patient's pre-treatment MRI. The patients were divided into equal groups to form a training set and an independent test set. Two multivariate machine learning models (logistic regression and a support vector machine) based on imaging features were trained to predict pCR in (a) all patients with NAT, (b) patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT), and (c) triple-negative or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (TN/HER2+) patients who had NAT. The multivariate models were tested using the independent test set, and the area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve (AUC) was calculated.

resultsOut of the 288 patients, 64 achieved pCR. The AUC values for predicting pCR in TN/HER+ patients who received NAT were significant (0.707, 95% CI 0.582-0.833, p < 0.002).

conclusionsThe multivariate models based on pre-treatment MRI features were able to predict pCR in TN/HER2+ patients.

Indexed as

Machine LearningAdultAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBreastErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingMastectomy, SegmentalMiddle AgedNeoadjuvant TherapyNeoplasm StagingRetrospective StudiesERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesBreast cancerBreast cancer MRILogistic regressionMachine learningMRI radiomicsNeoadjuvant therapyPathologic complete responseSupport vector machines

Identifiers

PMID30328048
PMCPMC6483397

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.