Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37345078›Full record

ArticleCancers2023

Machine Learning Algorithms to Predict Breast Cancer Recurrence Using Structured and Unstructured Sources from Electronic Health Records.

Lorena González-Castro, Marcela Chávez, Patrick Duflot, Valérie Bleret, Alistair G Martin, Marc Zobel, Jama Nateqi, Simon Lin, José J Pazos-Arias, Guilherme Del Fiol and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Applications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Breast Cancer Care Delivery and Education: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Lorena González-CastroSchool of Telecommunication Engineering, University of Vigo, 36310 Vigo, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-2316-5986
Marcela ChávezDepartment of Information System Management, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-4295-4254
Patrick DuflotDepartment of Information System Management, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-5378-5217
Valérie BleretSenology Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium.
Alistair G MartinScience Department, Symptoma GmbH, 1030 Vienna, Austria.
Marc ZobelScience Department, Symptoma GmbH, 1030 Vienna, Austria.
Jama NateqiScience Department, Symptoma GmbH, 1030 Vienna, Austria.
Simon LinScience Department, Symptoma GmbH, 1030 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-9870-2198
José J Pazos-AriasatlanTTic Research Center, Department of Telematics Engineering, University of Vigo, 36310 Vigo, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0424-5481
Guilherme Del FiolDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9954-6799
Martín López-NoresatlanTTic Research Center, Department of Telematics Engineering, University of Vigo, 36310 Vigo, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-4802-607X
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège · BEUniversidade de Vigo · ESParacelsus Medical University · ATUniversity of Utah · US

Funding

European Union 875406
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recurrence is a critical aspect of breast cancer (BC) that is inexorably tied to mortality. Reuse of healthcare data through Machine Learning (ML) algorithms offers great opportunities to improve the stratification of patients at risk of cancer recurrence. We hypothesized that combining features from structured and unstructured sources would provide better prediction results for 5-year cancer recurrence than either source alone. We collected and preprocessed clinical data from a cohort of BC patients, resulting in 823 valid subjects for analysis. We derived three sets of features: structured information, features from free text, and a combination of both. We evaluated the performance of five ML algorithms to predict 5-year cancer recurrence and selected the best-performing to test our hypothesis. The XGB (eXtreme Gradient Boosting) model yielded the best performance among the five evaluated algorithms, with precision = 0.900, recall = 0.907, F1-score = 0.897, and area under the receiver operating characteristic AUROC = 0.807. The best prediction results were achieved with the structured dataset, followed by the unstructured dataset, while the combined dataset achieved the poorest performance. ML algorithms for BC recurrence prediction are valuable tools to improve patient risk stratification, help with post-cancer monitoring, and plan more effective follow-up. Structured data provides the best results when fed to ML algorithms. However, an approach based on natural language processing offers comparable results while potentially requiring less mapping effort.

Indexed as

breast cancermachine learningpatient stratificationrecurrence predictionsecondary usestructured dataunstructured data

Identifiers

PMID37345078
PMCPMC10216131
OpenAlexW4381597286

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.