Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41298623›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Predicting the response of triple negative breast cancer to neoadjuvant systemic therapy via biology-based modeling and habitat analysis.

Casey E Stowers, Chengyue Wu, Clinton Yam, Jingfei Ma, Gaiane M Rauch, Thomas E Yankeelov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Casey E StowersOden Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
Chengyue WuOden Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
Clinton YamDepartments of Breast Medical Oncology , The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Jingfei MaDepartments of Imaging Physics , The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center , Houston, TX, USA.
Gaiane M RauchDepartments of Abdominal Imaging , The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center , Houston, TX, USA.
Thomas E YankeelovOden Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA. tey@utexas.edu.

Funding

Quantitative MRI for Predicting Response of Breast Cancer to Neoadjuvant TherapyU01CA142565 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI KARCZMAR, GREGORY S., NANDA, RITA · 2010 to 2019
$4.5M
INTEGRATING OMICS AND QUANTITATIVE IMAGING DATA IN CO-CLINICAL TRIALS TO PREDICT TREATMENT RESPONSE IN TRIPLE NEGATIVE BREAST CANCERU24CA226110 · NCI · BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE · PI LEWIS, MICHAEL T., RUBIN, DANIEL L · 2019 to 2023
$3.2M
Image Driven Multi-Scale Modeling to Predict Treatment Response in Breast CancerU01CA174706 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI QUARANTA, VITO, YANKEELOV, THOMAS E · 2013 to 2018
$2.5M
National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program DE2137420NCI NIH HHS U01 CA142565NCI NIH HHS U01CA142565NCI NIH HHS U01 CA174706NCI NIH HHS U24 CA226110
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite being the standard-of-care treatment, neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) attains a complete response only in approximately half of the patients with triple negative breast cancer. Thus, methods to predict and optimize patient response to NAT are needed. Previously, we employed patient-specific MRI data to calibrate a biology-based mathematical model that describes cell movement, proliferation, and death due to drug at the tumor level and cell proliferation at an image voxel level. We now extend our approach by using MRI data to group voxels into "habitats" whereby tumor cells of a habitat share the same proliferation. With this approach, we now calibrate habitat-informed proliferation rates for each habitat rather than local proliferation rates. When comparing error in tumor cell number and volume at the time of calibration, the local calibration has significantly (p < 0.05) lower error than the habitat-informed calibration. However, the habitat-informed predictions of a future timepoint have significantly lower error than the local predictions. Compared to the local calibration, the habitat-informed calibration also requires fewer parameters, reducing the calibration time by a factor of 17. These results suggest that a habitat-informed calibration can provide both accurate and efficient predictions of breast cancer response to NAT.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalNeoadjuvant TherapyTriple Negative Breast NeoplasmsCell ProliferationFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID41298623
PMCPMC12657976

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.