ArticleComputational and structural biotechnology journal2023
Survival analysis of patient groups defined by unsupervised machine learning clustering methods based on patient metabolomic data.
Article in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Integrated Care to Learning Systems.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- A hybrid AHP and K-means model for biopsychosocial surgical prioritization: validation in a high-complexity ENT unit.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Article
- Explainable machine learning for preoperative relapse prediction in molecularly stratified endometrial cancer: A single-center finnish cohort study.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Meta-analyses failed to accurately identify patients with non-metastatic breast cancer who are likely to benefit from chemotherapy, and metabolomics could provide new answers. In our previous published work, patients were clustered using five different unsupervised machine learning (ML) methods resulting in the identification of three clusters with distinct clinical and simulated survival data. The objective of this study was to evaluate the survival outcomes, with extended follow-up, using the same 5 different methods of unsupervised machine learning. Experimental design: Forty-nine patients, diagnosed between 2013 and 2016, with non-metastatic BC were included retrospectively. Median follow-up was extended to 85.8 months. 449 metabolites were extracted from tumor resection samples by combined Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS). Survival analyses were reported grouping together Cluster 1 and 2 versus cluster 3. Bootstrap optimization was applied. Results: PCA k-means, K-sparse and Spectral clustering were the most effective methods to predict 2-year progression-free survival with bootstrap optimization (PFSb); as bootstrap example, with PCA k-means method, PFSb were 94% for cluster 1&2 versus 82% for cluster 3 (p = 0.01). PCA k-means method performed best, with higher reproducibility (mean HR=2 (95%CI [1.4-2.7]); probability of p ≤ 0.05 85%). Cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) analyses highlighted a discrepancy between the 5 ML unsupervised methods. Conclusion: Our study is a proof-of-principle that it is possible to use unsupervised ML methods on metabolomic data to predict PFS survival outcomes, with the best performance for PCA k-means. A larger population study is needed to draw conclusions from CSS and OS analyses.
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.