Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39088457›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Performance assessment of hybrid machine learning approaches for breast cancer and recurrence prediction.

Abhilash Pati, Amrutanshu Panigrahi, Manoranjan Parhi, Jayant Giri, Hong Qin, Saurav Mallik, Sambit Ranjan Pattanayak, Umang Kumar Agrawal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors.

Abhilash PatiDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Siksha 'O' Anusandhan (Deemed to be University), Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.ORCID 0000-0002-3418-4202
Amrutanshu PanigrahiDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Siksha 'O' Anusandhan (Deemed to be University), Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.
Manoranjan ParhiCentre for Data Science, Siksha 'O' Anusandhan (Deemed to be University), Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.
Jayant GiriDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Yeshwantrao Chavan College of Engineering, Nagpur, India.ORCID 0000-0003-4438-2613
Hong QinDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, Chattanooga, Tamil Nadu, United States of America.
Saurav MallikDepartment of Environmental Health, Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-4107-6784
Sambit Ranjan PattanayakDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Siksha 'O' Anusandhan (Deemed to be University), Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.
Umang Kumar AgrawalSchool of Computer Engineering, KIIT (Deemed to be University), Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast cancer is a major health concern for women everywhere and a major killer of women. Malignant tumors may be distinguished from benign ones, allowing for early diagnosis of this disease. Therefore, doctors need an accurate method of diagnosing tumors as either malignant or benign. Even if therapy begins immediately after diagnosis, some cancer cells may persist in the body, increasing the risk of a recurrence. Metastasis and recurrence are the leading causes of death from breast cancer. Therefore, detecting a return of breast cancer early has become a pressing medical issue. Evaluating and contrasting various Machine Learning (ML) techniques for breast cancer and recurrence prediction is crucial to choosing the best successful method. Inaccurate forecasts are common when using datasets with a large number of attributes. This study addresses the need for effective feature selection and optimization methods by introducing Recursive Feature Elimination (RFE) and Grey Wolf Optimizer (GWO), in response to the limitations observed in existing approaches. In this research, the performance evaluation of methods is enhanced by employing the RFE and GWO, considering the Wisconsin Diagnostic Breast Cancer (WDBC) and Wisconsin Prognostic Breast Cancer (WPBC) datasets taken from the UCI-ML repository. Various preprocessing techniques are applied to raw data, including imputation, scaling, and others. In the second step, relevant feature correlations are used with RFE to narrow down candidate discriminative features. The GWO chooses the best possible combination of attributes for the most accurate result in the next step. We use seven ML classifiers in both datasets to make a binary decision. On the WDBC and WPBC datasets, several experiments have shown accuracies of 98.25% and 93.27%, precisions of 98.13% and 95.56%, sensitivities of 99.06% and 96.63%, specificities of 96.92% and 73.33%, F1-scores of 98.59% and 96.09% and AUCs of 0.982 and 0.936, respectively. The hybrid approach's superior feature selection improved the accuracy of breast cancer performance indicators and recurrence classification.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsMachine LearningNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalAlgorithmsFemaleHumansPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID39088457
PMCPMC11293701

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.