ArticleScientific reports2025
A comparative analysis of three graph neural network models for predicting axillary lymph node metastasis in early-stage breast cancer.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The presence of axillary lymph node metastasis (ALNM) in breast cancer patients is an important factor in deciding whether to have axillary surgery or pursue alternative treatments. Based on axillary ultrasound (US) and histopathologic data, three graph neural network models were compared to predict ALNM in early-stage breast cancer. The patients were randomly divided into two data sets: training (80%) and testing (20%). Predictive performance was measured using accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, F1 score, and area under the curve (AUC). In the test cohort, the graph convolutional network (GCN) performed the best in predicting ALNM, with an AUC of 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69-0.84). In conclusion, the GCN model has the potential to provide a noninvasive tool for detecting ALNM and can aid in clinical decision-making. Prospective studies are expected to provide high-level evidence for clinical usage in future investigations.
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.