ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Prediction of lymph node metastasis in patients with breast invasive micropapillary carcinoma based on machine learning and SHapley Additive exPlanations framework.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes in Women With Immune Abnormalities: Machine Learning Model Development and Validation Using First-Trimester Sonographic Features.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Combining ultrasound and core needle histology imaging Radiopathomics model in predicting axillary lymph node metastasis in triple-negative breast cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Risk prediction for chronic atrophic gastritis using a random forest model: A multicenter study.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- Perioperative machine learning models with SHAP interpretation for predicting adverse outcomes in breast cancer surgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Multi-regional feature integration on enhanced CT for lymph node metastasis prediction in gastric cancer: a novel radiomics approach.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- SEER-based machine learning prediction of bone metastasis in breast cancer: model development and validation.Gland surgery · 2025Article
- Preoperative lymph node metastasis risk assessment in invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: development of a machine learning-based predictive model with a web-based calculator.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Predicting sentinel lymph node metastasis in breast cancer: a study based on the SEER database.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Article
- Predicting tigecycline-related adverse events in infected patients: a machine learning approach with clinical interpretability.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Machine Learning Links T-cell Function and Spatial Localization to Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy and Clinical Outcome in Pancreatic Cancer.Cancer immunology research · 2024Article
- Predicting mortality and recurrence in colorectal cancer: Comparative assessment of predictive models.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Construction of a risk prediction model for lung infection after chemotherapy in lung cancer patients based on the machine learning algorithm.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Machine learning links T cell function and spatial localization to neoadjuvant immunotherapy and clinical outcome in pancreatic cancer.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Review
- The prediction of distant metastasis risk for male breast cancer patients based on an interpretable machine learning model.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Abstract: Background and purpose: Machine learning (ML) is applied for outcome prediction and treatment support. This study aims to develop different ML models to predict risk of axillary lymph node metastasis (LNM) in breast invasive micropapillary carcinoma (IMPC) and to explore the risk factors of LNM. Methods: From the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database and the records of our hospital, a total of 1547 patients diagnosed with breast IMPC were incorporated in this study. The ML model is built and the external validation is carried out. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) framework was applied to explain the optimal model; multivariable analysis was performed with logistic regression (LR); and nomograms were constructed according to the results of LR analysis. Results: Age and tumor size were correlated with LNM in both cohorts. The luminal subtype is the most common in patients, with the tumor size <=20mm. Compared to other models, Xgboost was the best ML model with the biggest AUC of 0.813 (95% CI: 0.7994 - 0.8262) and the smallest Brier score of 0.186 (95% CI: 0.799-0.826). SHAP plots demonstrated that tumor size was the most vital risk factor for LNM. In both training and test sets, Xgboost had better AUC (0.761 vs 0.745; 0.813 vs 0.775; respectively), and it also achieved a smaller Brier score (0.202 vs 0.204; 0.186 vs 0.191; 0.220 vs 0.221; respectively) than the nomogram model based on LR in those three different sets. After adjusting for five most influential variables (tumor size, age, ER, HER-2, and PR), prediction score based on the Xgboost model was still correlated with LNM (adjusted OR:2.73, 95% CI: 1.30-5.71, P=0.008). Conclusions: The Xgboost model outperforms the traditional LR-based nomogram model in predicting the LNM of IMPC patients. Combined with SHAP, it can more intuitively reflect the influence of different variables on the LNM. The tumor size was the most important risk factor of LNM for breast IMPC patients. The prediction score obtained by the Xgboost model could be a good indicator for LNM.
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.