Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33889025›Full record

ArticleCancer management and research2021

Machine Learning Models to Improve the Differentiation Between Benign and Malignant Breast Lesions on Ultrasound: A Multicenter External Validation Study.

Ling Huo, Yao Tan, Shu Wang, Cuizhi Geng, Yi Li, XiangJun Ma, Bin Wang, YingJian He, Chen Yao, Tao Ouyang

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer management and research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03080623 (Ultrasound-based Diagnostic Model for Differentiating Malignant Breast Lesion From Benign Lesion), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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.

NCT03080623 completednot on this map

Ultrasound-based Diagnostic Model for Differentiating Malignant Breast Lesion From Benign Lesion

TypeobservationalSponsorPeking UniversityRan2018 to 2019Enrolled1,981ConditionsBreast Cancer Female, Diagnoses Disease
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Machine learning and new insights for breast cancer diagnosis.The Journal of international medical research · 2024
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

10 authors.

Ling Huo *Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Breast Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Yao Tan *Department of Biostatistics, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Shu WangDepartment of Breast Center, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0002-8651-4795
Cuizhi GengThe Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, People's Republic of China.
Yi LiShunyi District Health Care Hospital for Women and Children of Beijing, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
XiangJun MaHaidian Maternal and Child Health Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Bin WangDepartment of Biostatistics, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0003-0012-9835
YingJian HeKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Breast Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Chen YaoDepartment of Biostatistics, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0003-4224-5535
Tao OuyangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Breast Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, People's Republic of China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to establish and evaluate the usefulness of a simple, practical, and easy-to-promote machine learning model based on ultrasound imaging features for diagnosing breast cancer (BC). MATERIALS AND

methodsLogistic regression, random forest, extra trees, support vector, multilayer perceptron, and XG Boost models were developed. The modeling data set of 1345 cases was from a tertiary class A hospital in China. The external validation data set of 1965 cases were from 3 tertiary class A hospitals and 2 primary hospitals. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used as the main evaluation index, and pathological biopsy was used as the gold standard for evaluating each model. Diagnostic capability was also compared with that of clinicians.

resultsAmong the six models, the logistic model showed superior diagnostic efficiency, with an AUC of 0.771 and 0.906 and Brier scores of 0.181 and 0.165 in the test and validation sets, respectively. The AUCs of the clinician diagnosis and the logistic model were 0.913 and 0.906. Their AUCs in the tertiary class A hospitals were 0.915 and 0.915, respectively, and were 0.894 and 0.873 in primary hospitals, respectively.

conclusionThe externally validated logical model can be used to distinguish between malignant and benign breast lesions in ultrasound images. Compared with clinician diagnosis, the logistic model has better diagnostic efficiency, making it potentially useful to assist in screening, particularly in lower level medical institutions.

trial registrationhttp://www.clinicaltrials.gov. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03080623.

Indexed as

breast cancerdiagnostic accuracymachine learningpatient stratificationscreening modalitiesultrasound imaging

Identifiers

PMID33889025
PMCPMC8057795

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.