Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39839787›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2024

Artificial intelligence in breast cancer survival prediction: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.

Zohreh Javanmard, Saba Zarean Shahraki, Kosar Safari, Abbas Omidi, Sadaf Raoufi, Mahsa Rajabi, Mohammad Esmaeil Akbari, Mehrad Aria

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
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.

Zohreh JavanmardDepartment of Health Information Management, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Saba Zarean ShahrakiDepartment of Health Information Technology and Management, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Kosar SafariDepartment of Aerospace Engineering, Khaje Nasir Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Abbas OmidiDepartment of Electrical and Software Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Sadaf RaoufiDepartment of Computer Science, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, United States.
Mahsa RajabiDepartment of Electrical Engineering, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran.
Mohammad Esmaeil AkbariCancer Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mehrad AriaCancer Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

breast cancerclinical datadeep learningmachine learningmeta-analysissurvival predictionsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID39839787
PMCPMC11747035

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.