Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31226956›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2019

Artificial neural network models to predict nodal status in clinically node-negative breast cancer.

Looket Dihge, Mattias Ohlsson, Patrik Edén, Pär-Ola Bendahl, Lisa Rydén

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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.

Looket DihgeDepartment of Clinical Sciences Lund, Division of Surgery, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Mattias OhlssonDepartment of Astronomy and Theoretical Physics, Division of Computational Biology and Biological Physics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Patrik EdénDepartment of Astronomy and Theoretical Physics, Division of Computational Biology and Biological Physics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Pär-Ola BendahlDepartment of Clinical Sciences Lund, Division of Oncology and Pathology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Lisa RydénDepartment of Clinical Sciences Lund, Division of Surgery, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. lisa.ryden@med.lu.se.

Funding

Skåne County Council's Research and Development Foundation 2016/623611The Erling-Persson Family Foundation 2018/1008The Governmental Funding of Clinical Research within the National Health Service (ALF) 2014/434901The Swedish Breast Cancer Organization 2017/1213
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is standard staging procedure for nodal status in breast cancer, but lacks therapeutic benefit for patients with benign sentinel nodes. For patients with positive sentinel nodes, individualized surgical strategies are applied depending on the extent of nodal involvement. Preoperative prediction of nodal status is thus important for individualizing axillary surgery avoiding unnecessary surgery. We aimed to predict nodal status in clinically node-negative breast cancer and identify candidates for SLNB omission by including patient-related and pathological characteristics into artificial neural network (ANN) models.

methodsPatients with primary breast cancer were consecutively included between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2012 in a prospectively maintained pathology database. Clinical- and radiological data were extracted from patient's files and only clinically node-negative patients constituted the final study cohort. ANN-based models for nodal prediction were constructed including 15 risk variables for nodal status. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test (HL) were used to assess performance and calibration of three predictive ANN-based models for no lymph node metastasis (N0), metastases in 1-3 lymph nodes (N1) and metastases in ≥ 4 lymph nodes (N2). Linear regression models for nodal prediction were calculated for comparison.

resultsEight hundred patients (N0, n = 514; N1, n = 232; N2, n = 54) were included. Internally validated AUCs for N0 versus N+ was 0.740 (95% CI = 0.723-0.758); median HL was 9.869 (P = 0.274), for N1 versus N0, 0.705 (95% CI = 0.686-0.724; median HL: 7.421; P = 0.492) and for N2 versus N0 and N1, 0.747 (95% CI = 0.728-0.765; median HL: 9.220; P = 0.324). Tumor size and vascular invasion were top-ranked predictors of all three end-points, followed by estrogen receptor status and lobular cancer for prediction of N2. For each end-point, ANN models showed better discriminatory performance than multivariable logistic regression models. Accepting a false negative rate (FNR) of 10% for predicting N0 by the ANN model, SLNB could have been abstained in 27.25% of patients with clinically node-negative axilla.

conclusionsIn this retrospective study, ANN showed promising result as decision-supporting tools for estimating nodal disease. If prospectively validated, patients least likely to have nodal metastasis could be spared SLNB using predictive models.

trial registrationRegistered in the ISRCTN registry with study ID ISRCTN14341750 . Date of registration 23/11/2018. Retrospectively registered.

Indexed as

Neural Networks, ComputerAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArea Under CurveAxillaBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, LobularFemaleHumansLinear ModelsLymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesMiddle AgedNeovascularization, PathologicReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, EstrogenArtificial neural networksBreast cancerNodal statusPrediction modelsSentinel lymph node biopsy

Identifiers

PMID31226956
PMCPMC6588854

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.