SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2024
Artificial intelligence in breast cancer survival prediction: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence networks for assessing the prognosis of gastrointestinal cancer to immunotherapy based on genetic mutation features: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Pooled it
- Review
- Beyond classical models: LLM-driven survival analysis for breast cancer prognosis using European cancer registry data.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Interpretable machine learning models for bladder cancer overall survival prediction development and external validation via SEER database and Chinese cohort analysis.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- Breast Cancer Surgery: Past, Present and Future-A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- An NLP-Driven Framework for Automated Radiology-Pathology Concordance Assessment in Breast Biopsy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Development and validation of an interpretable machine learning model for postoperative radiotherapy decision-making in ypN0 breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a real-world study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Machine learning-based prognostic model for metastatic breast cancer and its interpretability: a multicenter retrospective study.Gland surgery · 2025Article
- Developing a prediction model for persistent airflow limitation in asthmatic children.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Perspectives of family medicine residents on artificial intelligence for survival estimation in patients with serious illness.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Male Breast Cancer: Epidemiology, Diagnosis, Molecular Mechanisms, Therapeutics, and Future Prospective.Oncology research · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Breast cancer (BC), as a leading cause of cancer mortality in women, demands robust prediction models for early diagnosis and personalized treatment. Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) algorithms offer promising solutions for automated survival prediction, driving this study's systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: Three online databases (Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus) were comprehensively searched (January 2016-August 2023) using key terms ("Breast Cancer", "Survival Prediction", and "Machine Learning") and their synonyms. Original articles applying ML algorithms for BC survival prediction using clinical data were included. The quality of studies was assessed via the Qiao Quality Assessment tool. Results: Amongst 140 identified articles, 32 met the eligibility criteria. Analyzed ML methods achieved a mean validation accuracy of 89.73%. Hybrid models, combining traditional and modern ML techniques, were mostly considered to predict survival rates (40.62%). Supervised learning was the dominant ML paradigm (75%). Common ML methodologies included pre-processing, feature extraction, dimensionality reduction, and classification. Deep Learning (DL), particularly Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), emerged as the preferred modern algorithm within these methodologies. Notably, 81.25% of studies relied on internal validation, primarily using K-fold cross-validation and train/test split strategies. Conclusion: The findings underscore the significant potential of AI-based algorithms in enhancing the accuracy of BC survival predictions. However, to ensure the robustness and generalizability of these predictive models, future research should emphasize the importance of rigorous external validation. Such endeavors will not only validate the efficacy of these models across diverse populations but also pave the way for their integration into clinical practice, ultimately contributing to personalized patient care and improved survival outcomes. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42024513350.
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.