ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2024
Identification of a Novel Biomarker Panel for Breast Cancer Screening.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- SEFA: Semantic Embedding-Based Feature Augmentation of Biomedical Language-Model Embeddings Improves Interpretable Metabolomic Prediction of Lung Cancer.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- A machine learning‑enhanced serum metabolomics model for non‑invasive detection of gastric cancer.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2026Article
- An update on schistosomicide and tumoricide in the future: arachidonic acid.Lipids in health and disease · 2025Review
- Machine Learning-Driven Insights in Cancer Metabolomics: From Subtyping to Biomarker Discovery and Prognostic Modeling.Metabolites · 2025Review
- Metabolomic Analysis of Breast Cancer in Colombian Patients: Exploring Molecular Signatures in Different Subtypes and Stages.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Interpretable Machine Learning for Serum-Based Metabolomics in Breast Cancer Diagnostics: Insights from Multi-Objective Feature Selection-Driven LightGBM-SHAP Models.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- The treatment of breast cancer in the era of precision medicine.Cancer biology & medicine · 2025Review
- Metabolomics in cancer detection: A review of techniques, biomarkers, and clinical utility.BioMedicine · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Breast cancer remains a major public health concern, and early detection is crucial for improving survival rates. Metabolomics offers the potential to develop non-invasive screening and diagnostic tools based on metabolic biomarkers. However, the inherent complexity of metabolomic datasets and the high dimensionality of biomarkers complicates the identification of diagnostically relevant features, with multiple studies demonstrating limited consensus on the specific metabolites involved. Unlike previous studies that rely on singular feature selection techniques such as Partial Least Square (PLS) or LASSO regression, this research combines supervised and unsupervised machine learning methods with random sampling strategies, offering a more robust and interpretable approach to feature selection. This study aimed to identify a parsimonious and robust set of biomarkers for breast cancer diagnosis using metabolomics data. Plasma samples from 185 breast cancer patients and 53 controls (from the Cooperative Human Tissue Network, USA) were analyzed. This study also overcomes the common issue of dataset imbalance by using propensity score matching (PSM), which ensures reliable comparisons between cancer and control groups. We employed Univariate Naïve Bayes, L2-regularized Support Vector Classifier (SVC), Principal Component Analysis (PCA), and feature engineering techniques to refine and select the most informative features. Our best-performing feature set comprised 11 biomarkers, including 9 metabolites (SM(OH) C22:2, SM C18:0, C0, C3OH, C14:2OH, C16:2OH, LysoPC a C18:1, PC aa C36:0 and Asparagine), a metabolite ratio (Kynurenine-to-Tryptophan), and 1 demographic variable (Age), achieving an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 98%. These results demonstrate the potential for a robust, cost-effective, and non-invasive breast cancer screening and diagnostic tool, offering significant clinical value for early detection and personalized patient management.
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.