Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41030436›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in immunology2025

Integrating deep learning features from mammography with SHAP values for a machine learning model predicting over 5-year recurrence of breast ductal carcinoma

Yupeng Sha, Quan Yuan, Yi Du, Shuqi Yang, Ming Niu, Xiaoshuan Liang, Shanshan Sun, Tong Li, Shu Gong, Jiguang Han

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

10 authors.

Yupeng Sha *Department of Breast Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.
Quan Yuan *Department of Breast Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.
Yi Du *Department of Breast Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.
Shuqi YangQuanzhou First Hospital Affiliated to Fujian Medical University, Quanzhou, Fujian, China.
Ming NiuDepartment of Breast Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.
Xiaoshuan LiangDepartment of Breast Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.
Shanshan SunDepartment of Breast Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.
Tong LiDepartment of Breast Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.
Shu GongDepartment of Breast Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.
Jiguang HanDepartment of Breast Surgery, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In women with ductal carcinoma Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 140 DCIS patients from Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital (2011-2020, followed up to 2025). Preoperative digital mammograms and clinicopathological data were collected, with mammographic features extracted using pyradiomics and supervised by a senior radiologist. Feature selection employed 10-fold cross-validated LASSO regression. The dataset was split into training (n=100) and validation (n=40) sets (10:4 ratio). Sixteen machine learning algorithms combining mammographic deep learning features and clinicopathological variables were developed and compared for predicting DCIS recurrence. Model performance was assessed using ROC, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and SHAP values for interpretation. Results: The Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM) algorithm had the best predictive performance, with an AUC of 0.918 (95% CI 0.873-0.963) in the test set. SHAP values indicated that the mammographic signature (MS) was the most significant predictor, followed by Ki-67 index and histological grade. Patients not receiving radiotherapy had higher recurrence rates than those who did. Decision curve analysis validated the model's clinical utility across various risk thresholds. Conclusion: Our study developed an interpretable GBM model incorporating mammographic and clinical data to predict DCIS recurrence (AUC = 0.918). Key predictors were mammographic signature, Ki-67, and tumor grade, offering clinicians a practical tool for personalized postoperative management.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Intraductal, NoninfiltratingDeep LearningMammographyMastectomy, SegmentalNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalAdultAgedFemaleHumansMachine LearningMiddle AgedPrognosisRetrospective Studiesbreast-conserving surgerydeep learningductal carcinoma in situmammographyrecurrence

Identifiers

PMID41030436
PMCPMC12477132

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.