Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37512542›Full record

ArticleMetabolites2023

Ensemble Learning for Breast Cancer Lesion Classification: A Pilot Validation Using Correlated Spectroscopic Imaging and Diffusion-Weighted Imaging.

Ajin Joy, Marlene Lin, Melissa Joines, Andres Saucedo, Stephanie Lee-Felker, Jennifer Baker, Aichi Chien, Uzay Emir, Paul M Macey, M Albert Thomas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Metabolites, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Ajin JoyRadiological Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3641-1218
Marlene LinRadiological Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.ORCID 0009-0001-2089-2849
Melissa JoinesRadiological Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
Andres SaucedoRadiological Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
Stephanie Lee-FelkerRadiological Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
Jennifer BakerSurgery, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
Aichi ChienRadiological Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
Uzay EmirSchool of Health Sciences, College of Health and Human Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5376-0431
Paul M MaceySchool of Nursing, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4093-7458
M Albert ThomasRadiological Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The main objective of this work was to evaluate the application of individual and ensemble machine learning models to classify malignant and benign breast masses using features from two-dimensional (2D) correlated spectroscopy spectra extracted from five-dimensional echo-planar correlated spectroscopic imaging (5D EP-COSI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI). Twenty-four different metabolite and lipid ratios with respect to diagonal fat peaks (1.4 ppm, 5.4 ppm) from 2D spectra, and water and fat peaks (4.7 ppm, 1.4 ppm) from one-dimensional non-water-suppressed (NWS) spectra were used as the features. Additionally, water fraction, fat fraction and water-to-fat ratios from NWS spectra and apparent diffusion coefficients (ADC) from DWI were included. The nine most important features were identified using recursive feature elimination, sequential forward selection and correlation analysis. XGBoost (AUC: 93.0%, Accuracy: 85.7%, F1-score: 88.9%, Precision: 88.2%, Sensitivity: 90.4%, Specificity: 84.6%) and GradientBoost (AUC: 94.3%, Accuracy: 89.3%, F1-score: 90.7%, Precision: 87.9%, Sensitivity: 94.2%, Specificity: 83.4%) were the best-performing models. Conventional biomarkers like choline, myo-Inositol, and glycine were statistically significant predictors. Key features contributing to the classification were ADC, 2D diagonal peaks at 0.9 ppm, 2.1 ppm, 3.5 ppm, and 5.4 ppm, cross peaks between 1.4 and 0.9 ppm, 4.3 and 4.1 ppm, 2.3 and 1.6 ppm, and the triglyceryl-fat cross peak. The results highlight the contribution of the 2D spectral peaks to the model, and they demonstrate the potential of 5D EP-COSI for early breast cancer detection.

Indexed as

breast cancercholinecorrelated spectroscopic imagingdiffusion weighted imagingglycinelipidsmachine learningmyo-inositolwater

Identifiers

PMID37512542
PMCPMC10385820

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.