Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40201726›Full record

ReviewBJR artificial intelligence2024

Radiologic imaging biomarkers in triple-negative breast cancer: a literature review about the role of artificial intelligence and the way forward.

Kanika Bhalla, Qi Xiao, José Marcio Luna, Emily Podany, Tabassum Ahmad, Foluso O Ademuyiwa, Andrew Davis, Debbie Lee Bennett, Aimilia Gastounioti

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BJR artificial intelligence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Integrating deep learning and radiomics for precise identification of luminal A/B breast cancer subtypes on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

9 authors.

Kanika BhallaBreast Image Computing Lab, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.
Qi XiaoMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.
José Marcio LunaMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.
Emily PodanyDivision of Hematology, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.
Tabassum AhmadMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.
Foluso O AdemuyiwaAlvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.
Andrew DavisAlvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.
Debbie Lee BennettMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.
Aimilia GastouniotiBreast Image Computing Lab, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3359-7195

Funding

Advancing breast cancer risk assessment with digital breast tomosynthesisR01CA286120 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Aimilia Gastounioti · 2024 to 2026
$3.1M
Prognostic Radiomic Signatures in Prostate Cancer Patients on Active SurveillanceK22CA282357 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI LUNA CASTANEDA, JOSE MARCIO · 2023 to 2025
$485k
NCI NIH HHS K22 CA282357NCI NIH HHS R01 CA286120
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast cancer is one of the most common and deadly cancers in women. Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) accounts for approximately 10%-15% of breast cancer diagnoses and is an aggressive molecular breast cancer subtype associated with important challenges in its diagnosis, treatment, and prognostication. This poses an urgent need for developing more effective and personalized imaging biomarkers for TNBC. Towards this direction, artificial intelligence (AI) for radiologic imaging holds a prominent role, leveraging unique advantages of radiologic breast images, being used routinely for TNBC diagnosis, staging, and treatment planning, and offering high-resolution whole-tumour visualization, combined with the immense potential of AI to elucidate anatomical and functional properties of tumours that may not be easily perceived by the human eye. In this review, we synthesize the current state-of-the-art radiologic imaging applications of AI in assisting TNBC diagnosis, treatment, and prognostication. Our goal is to provide a comprehensive overview of radiomic and deep learning-based AI developments and their impact on advancing TNBC management over the last decade (2013-2024). For completeness of the review, we start with a brief introduction of AI, radiomics, and deep learning. Next, we focus on clinically relevant AI-based diagnostic, predictive, and prognostic models for radiologic breast images evaluated in TNBC. We conclude with opportunities and future directions for AI towards advancing diagnosis, treatment response predictions, and prognostic evaluations for TNBC.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencebreast cancerdeep learningmachine learningpredictive biomarkersprognostic biomarkersradiomicstriple-negative breast cancer

Identifiers

PMID40201726
PMCPMC11974408

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.