ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2025
Sureness of classification of breast cancers as pure ductal carcinoma
Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 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.
- Simultaneous Preoperative Prediction of Locally Advanced Breast Cancer, DCIS Component, and Multifocality Using Structured Mammographic Features and Gradient-Boosting Machine Learning.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Introduction to the JMI Special Issue on Advances in Breast Imaging.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Breast cancer may persist within milk ducts (ductal carcinoma Approach: We evaluated the performance in the task of distinguishing between pure DCIS and mixed IDC/DCIS breast cancers using computer-extracted radiomic features from dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging using 0.632+ bootstrapping methods (2000 folds) on 550 lesions (135 pure DCIS, 415 mixed IDC/DCIS). Lesion-based likelihood assurance was measured using a sureness metric based on the 95% confidence interval of the classifier output for each lesion. Results: The median and 95% CI of the 0.632+-corrected area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the task of classifying lesions as pure DCIS or mixed IDC/DCIS were 0.81 [0.75, 0.86]. The sureness metric varied across the dataset with a range of 0.0002 (low sureness) to 0.96 (high sureness), with combinations of high and low classifier output and high and low sureness for some lesions. Conclusions: Sureness metrics can provide additional insights into the ability of CADx algorithms to pre-operatively predict whether a lesion is invasive.
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.