ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2024
Comparative analysis of the spatial distribution of brain metastases across several primary cancers using machine learning and deep learning models.
Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Decoding the mechanisms underlying breast cancer brain metastasis: paving the way for precision therapeutics.Biomarker research · 2025Review
- The epigenetic landscape of brain metastasis.Oncogene · 2025Review
- Review
- Artificial intelligence in the task of segmentation and classification of brain metastases images: current challenges and future opportunities.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveBrain metastases (BM) are associated with poor prognosis and increased mortality rates, making them a significant clinical challenge. Studying BMs can aid in improving early detection and monitoring. Systematic comparisons of anatomical distributions of BM from different primary cancers, however, remain largely unavailable.
methodsTo test the hypothesis that anatomical BM distributions differ based on primary cancer type, we analyze the spatial coordinates of BMs for five different primary cancer types along principal component (PC) axes. The dataset includes 3949 intracranial metastases, labeled by primary cancer types and with six features. We employ PC coordinates to highlight the distinctions between various cancer types. We utilized different Machine Learning (ML) algorithms (RF, SVM, TabNet DL) models to establish the relationship between primary cancer diagnosis, spatial coordinates of BMs, age, and target volume.
resultsOur findings revealed that PC1 aligns most with the Y axis, followed by the Z axis, and has minimal correlation with the X axis. Based on PC1 versus PC2 plots, we identified notable differences in anatomical spreading patterns between Breast and Lung cancer, as well as Breast and Renal cancer. In contrast, Renal and Lung cancer, as well as Lung and Melanoma, showed similar patterns. Our ML and DL results demonstrated high accuracy in distinguishing BM distribution for different primary cancers, with the SVM algorithm achieving 97% accuracy using a polynomial kernel and TabNet achieving 96%. The RF algorithm ranked PC1 as the most important discriminating feature.
conclusionsIn summary, our results support accurate multiclass ML classification regarding brain metastases distribution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38563856What 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.