ArticleCancers2022
Machine Learning Algorithm for Distinguishing Ductal Carcinoma In Situ from Invasive Breast Cancer.
Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence in the radiologic assessment of ductal carcinomaFrontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Channel attention of the image for distinguishing ductal carcinomaGland surgery · 2026Article
- Imaging Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in the Era of De-Escalation: Role, Limits, and Clinical Implications for Risk-Adapted Management.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- BC-predict: mining of signal biomarkers and production of models for early-stage breast cancer subtyping and prognosis.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Differentiation between invasive ductal carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ by combining intratumoral and peritumoral ultrasound radiomics.Biomedical engineering online · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeGiven that early identification of breast cancer type allows for less-invasive therapies, we aimed to develop a machine learning model to discriminate between ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and minimally invasive breast cancer (MIBC).
methodsIn this retrospective study, the health records of 420 women who underwent biopsies between 2010 and 2020 to confirm breast cancer were collected. A trained XGBoost algorithm was used to classify cancers as either DCIS or MIBC using clinical characteristics, mammographic findings, ultrasonographic findings, and histopathological features. Its performance was measured against other methods using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, precision, and F1 score.
resultsThe model was trained using 357 women and tested using 63 women with an overall 420 patients (mean [standard deviation] age, 57.1 [12.0] years). The model performed well when feature importance was determined, reaching an accuracy of 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-0.91), an AUC of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.87-0.95), a specificity of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.67-0.83), and a sensitivity of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.76-0.94).
conclusionThe XGBoost model, combining clinical, mammographic, ultrasonographic, and histopathologic findings, can be used to discriminate DCIS from MIBC with an accuracy equivalent to that of experienced radiologists, thereby giving patients the widest range of therapeutic options.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.