ArticleClinical and experimental medicine2025
Machine learning approaches for predicting breast cancer recurrence using clinical and histopathological data.
Article in Clinical and experimental medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast cancer remains the most common malignancy among women worldwide, with recurrence representing a major clinical challenge. Although significant progress has been made in early detection and treatment, recurrence affects up to 40% of patients in Brazil, influencing survival outcomes and therapeutic decisions. In this context, Machine Learning offers valuable potential for enhancing recurrence prediction by enabling data-driven risk assessment and personalized patient care. In the present study, clinical and histopathological information was extracted from unstructured medical records of breast cancer patients. A clustering technique (K-Means) was applied to identify patient subgroups with varying tumor aggressiveness profiles. Survival outcomes were further analyzed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Two distinct subgroups were identified: for less aggressive tumors, Quadratic Discriminant Analysis achieved a remarkably high recall of 0.9872, while for more aggressive tumors, Random Forest provided the most favorable trade-off between recall (0.7296) and precision (0.6811). Future research should explore validation across multiple institutions, incorporate molecular biomarkers, and leverage deep learning approaches to enhance predictive performance.
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.