ArticleBMC medical imaging2025
Diagnostic accuracy of a machine learning model using radiomics features from breast synthetic MRI.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Immunohistochemical predictors of local recurrence in breast carcinoma: development and sensitivity validation of an IHC-based risk score.Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologieArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), the differentiation between benign and malignant breast masses relies on the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Magnetic Resonance Imaging (BI-RADS-MRI) lexicon. While BI-RADS-MRI classification demonstrates high sensitivity, specificities vary. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of machine learning models utilizing radiomics features derived from synthetic MRI to distinguish benign from malignant breast masses.
methodsPatients who underwent breast MRI, including a multi-dynamic multi-echo (MDME) sequence using 3.0 T MRI, and had histopathologically diagnosed enhanced breast mass lesions were retrospectively included. Clinical features, lesion shape features, texture features, and textural evaluation metrics were extracted. Machine learning models were trained and evaluated, and an ensemble model integrating BI-RADS and the machine learning model was also assessed.
resultsA total of 199 lesions (48 benign, 151 malignant) in 199 patients were included in the cross-validation dataset, while 43 lesions (15 benign, 28 malignant) in 40 new patients were included in the test dataset. For the test dataset, the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic for BI-RADS were 100%, 33.3%, 76.7%, and 0.667, respectively. The logistic regression model yielded 64.3% sensitivity, 80.0% specificity, 69.8% accuracy, and an AUC of 0.707. The ensemble model achieved 82.1% sensitivity, 86.7% specificity, 83.7% accuracy, and an AUC of 0.883. The AUC of the ensemble model was significantly larger than that of both BI-RADS and the machine learning model.
conclusionThe ensemble model integrating BI-RADS and machine learning improved lesion classification.
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.