Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35262831›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2022

Multi-center evaluation of artificial intelligent imaging and clinical models for predicting neoadjuvant chemotherapy response in breast cancer.

Tan Hong Qi, Ong Hiok Hian, Arjunan Muthu Kumaran, Tira J Tan, Tan Ryan Ying Cong, Ghislaine Lee Su-Xin, Elaine Hsuen Lim, Raymond Ng, Ming Chert Richard Yeo, Faye Lynette Lim Wei Tching and 15 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Machine learning and new insights for breast cancer diagnosis.The Journal of international medical research · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Predictive value ofEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023
    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

25 authors.

Tan Hong Qi *Division of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Ong Hiok Hian *School of Computer Science and Engineering, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Arjunan Muthu KumaranDivision of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Tira J TanDivision of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Tan Ryan Ying CongDivision of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1023-5730
Ghislaine Lee Su-XinDivision of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Elaine Hsuen LimDivision of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Raymond NgDivision of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Ming Chert Richard YeoDivision of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Faye Lynette Lim Wei TchingDivision of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Zhang ZewenDivision of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Christina Yang Shi HuiDivision of Surgery and Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Wong Ru XinDivision of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Su Kai Gideon OoiDivision of Oncologic Imaging, National Cancer Center Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Lester Chee Hao LeongDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9888-7134
Su Ming TanDivision of Breast Surgery, Changi General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Madhukumar PreethaDivision of Surgery and Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5070-4442
Yirong SimDivision of Surgery and Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8758-0455
Veronique Kiak Mien TanDivision of Surgery and Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8493-8191
Joe YeongDivision of Pathology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Wong Fuh YongDivision of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore. wong.fuh.yong@singhealth.com.sg.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6658-3371
Yiyu CaiSchool of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore, Singapore. MYYCai@ntu.edu.sg.
Wen Long NeiDivision of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore. nei.wen.long@singhealth.com.sg.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6027-1652
JBCR
Ai3

Funding

National Medical Research Council NMRC/ MOH-000166-00
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNeoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) plays an important role in the management of locally advanced breast cancer. It allows for downstaging of tumors, potentially allowing for breast conservation. NAC also allows for in-vivo testing of the tumors' response to chemotherapy and provides important prognostic information. There are currently no clearly defined clinical models that incorporate imaging with clinical data to predict response to NAC. Thus, the aim of this work is to develop a predictive AI model based on routine CT imaging and clinical parameters to predict response to NAC.

methodsThe CT scans of 324 patients with NAC from multiple centers in Singapore were used in this study. Four different radiomics models were built for predicting pathological complete response (pCR): first two were based on textural features extracted from peri-tumoral and tumoral regions, the third model based on novel space-resolved radiomics which extract feature maps using voxel-based radiomics and the fourth model based on deep learning (DL). Clinical parameters were included to build a final prognostic model.

resultsThe best performing models were based on space-resolved and DL approaches. Space-resolved radiomics improves the clinical AUCs of pCR prediction from 0.743 (0.650 to 0.831) to 0.775 (0.685 to 0.860) and our DL model improved it from 0.743 (0.650 to 0.831) to 0.772 (0.685 to 0.853). The tumoral radiomics model performs the worst with no improvement of the AUC from the clinical model. The peri-tumoral combined model gives moderate performance with an AUC of 0.765 (0.671 to 0.855).

conclusionsRadiomics features extracted from diagnostic CT augment the predictive ability of pCR when combined with clinical features. The novel space-resolved radiomics and DL radiomics approaches outperformed conventional radiomics techniques.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsNeoadjuvant TherapyBreastFemaleHumansPrognosisRetrospective StudiesArtificial intelligenceBreast cancerDeep learningMachine learningNeoadjuvant chemotherapyRadiomics

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.