ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2023
Development and external validation of a prediction model for brain metastases in patients with metastatic breast cancer.
Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decoding the mechanisms underlying breast cancer brain metastasis: paving the way for precision therapeutics.Biomarker research · 2025Review
- Review
- Investigation of Prevalence, Survival, and Molecular Type of Breast Cancer Patients with Brain Metastases.Advanced biomedical research · 2025Article
- Article
- Prognostic Factors in Postoperative Brain Metastases Derive From Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis.Clinical Medicine Insights. Oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBreast cancer patients with brain metastasis (BM) have a poor prognosis. This study aims to identify the risk factors of BM in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and establish a competing risk model for predicting the risk of brain metastases at different time points along the course of disease.
methodsPatients with MBC admitted to the breast disease center of Peking University First Hospital from 2008 to 2019 were selected and retrospectively analyzed to establish a risk prediction model for brain metastases. Patients with MBC admitted to eight breast disease centers from 2015 to 2017 were selected for external validation of the competing risk model. The competing risk approach was used to estimate cumulative incidence. Univariate Fine-Gray competing risk regression, optimal subset regression, and LASSO Cox regression were used to screen potential predictors of brain metastases. Based on the results, a competing risk model for predicting brain metastases was established. The discrimination of the model was evaluated using AUC, Brier score, and C-index. The calibration was evaluated by the calibration curves. The model was assessed for clinical utility by decision curve analysis (DCA), as well as by comparing the cumulative incidence of brain metastases between groups with different predicted risks.
resultsFrom 2008 to 2019, a total of 327 patients with MBC in the breast disease center of Peking University First Hospital were admitted into the training set for this study. Among them, 74 (22.6%) patients developed brain metastases. From 2015 to 2017, a total of 160 patients with MBC in eight breast disease centers were admitted into the validation set for this study. Among them, 26 (16.3%) patients developed brain metastases. BMI, age, histological type, breast cancer subtype, and extracranial metastasis pattern were included in the final competing risk model for BM. The C-index of the prediction model in the validation set was 0.695, and the AUCs for predicting the risk of brain metastases within 1, 3, and 5 years were 0.674, 0.670, and 0.729, respectively. Time-dependent DCA curves demonstrated a net benefit of the prediction model with thresholds of 9-26% and 13-40% when predicting the risk of brain metastases at 1 and 3 years, respectively. Significant differences were observed in the cumulative incidence of brain metastases between groups with different predicted risks (P < 0.05 by Gray's test).
conclusionsIn this study, a competing risk model for BM was innovatively established, with the multicenter data being used as an independent external validation set to confirm the predictive efficiency and universality of the model. The C-index, calibration curves, and DCA of the prediction model indicated good discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility, respectively. Considering the high risk of death in patients with metastatic breast cancer, the competing risk model of this study is more accurate in predicting the risk of brain metastases compared with the traditional Logistic and Cox regression models.
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.