Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41323506›Full record

ArticleCancer informatics2025

Unsupervised Random Forest Identifies Important Genetic Prognostic Factors for Breast Cancer Survival Time.

Benjamin Goldberg, Eric Nels Pederson, Zhengqing Ouyang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Benjamin GoldbergDepartment of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, School of Public Health & Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-5879-0697
Eric Nels PedersonDepartment of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, School of Public Health & Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0230-406X
Zhengqing OuyangDepartment of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, School of Public Health & Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2842-8503

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Breast cancer is one of the most prominent and deadly diseases in the world, and its prognosis varies widely based on the expression of certain genes. Identification of these genes is important for developing and interpreting clinical prognostic tests as well as furthering our understanding of breast cancer biology. We expand on prior efforts in the field toward identifying prognostic genes, by integrating powerful statistical methods. Methods: To this end, we use an unsupervised random forest model, which allows for robust learning of non-linear gene expression/survival relationships and the ability to identify the most important genes affecting both positive and negative breast cancer prognosis. In total, 1,518 participants were considered from the METABRIC dataset, using 20,387 mRNA expression level variables and 23 clinical variables including Results: Our research corroborates previous discoveries of 27 important prognostic genes while also identifying 3 genes as potentially novel prognostic factors. Based on gene ontology analysis, we additionally show that these genes have plausible connections to breast cancer biology that should be experimentally investigated. Conclusions: Here, we demonstrate the utility of the unsupervised random forest model over K-means clustering for identifying important genes in breast cancer.

Indexed as

cluster analysiscomputational modelsgene expressionsurvival analysisunsupervised learning

Identifiers

PMID41323506
PMCPMC12663042

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.