ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Personalized prediction of breast cancer candidates for Anti-HER2 therapy using
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurately evaluating human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2) expression status in breast cancer enables clinicians to develop individualized treatment plans and improve patient prognosis. The purpose of this study was to assess the performance of a machine learning (ML) model that was developed using Methods: This retrospective study enrolled breast cancer patients who underwent Results: XGBoost models exhibited the best predictive performance in both tasks. For Task 1, recursive feature elimination (RFE) was used to select 8 features, excluding pathological features, and the XGBoost model achieved AUCs of 0.888, 0.844 and 0.759 for the training, internal and external testing sets, respectively. The top three features according to the SHAP values were the tumour minimum diameter, mean standardized uptake value (SUVmean) and CTmean. For Task 2, 9 features were selected, including progesterone receptor (PR) status as a pathological feature. The XGBoost model achieved AUCs of 0.920, 0.814 and 0.693 for the training, internal and external testing sets, respectively. The top three features according to the SHAP values were the PR status, maximum tumour diameter and metabolic tumour volume (MTV). Conclusions: ML models that incorporate
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.