ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2026
Development and validation of an online prognostic risk stratification tool to assist decisions on perioperative chemotherapy for men with luminal early breast cancer.
Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMale breast cancer (MBC) is rare, and indications for chemotherapy (ChT) in luminal early MBC remain understudied. We aimed to develop a model to predict outcomes for these patients and identify candidates for ChT omission.
methodsLuminal early MBC patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program (diagnosed in 2010–2018, N = 2845) and a Chinese cohort (diagnosed in 2000–2020, N = 586) were included. SEER-derived patients (diagnosed in 2010–2016) were split into training (N = 1405) and test (N = 758) sets in a 65:35 ratio; others (diagnosed in 2017–2018) formed the US validation set (N = 682). Chinese patients constituted the CHN validation set. The response variable and primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Four machine learning models and a Cox-based nomogram were evaluated. Low- and high-risk groups were stratified utilizing the 5-year risk scores predicted by the optimal model. Survival analysis employed Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression.
resultsPatients in two risk groups exhibited significantly different OS across all datasets (all P < 0.001). ChT conferred no OS benefit in low-risk patients [ChT-free as reference: training set, hazard ratio (HR) = 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.88 to 1.60, P = 0.249; test set, HR = 1.19, 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.76, P = 0.375; US validation set, HR = 1.47, 95% CI, 0.73 to 2.94, P = 0.276; CHN validation set, HR = 0.95, 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.99, P = 0.891. Multivariable: comparable results]. For high-risk patients, ChT was significantly associated with superior OS [ChT-free as reference: training set, HR = 0.59, 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.74, P < 0.001; test set, HR = 0.68, 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.94, P = 0.019; US validation set, HR = 0.49, 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.84, P = 0.007; CHN validation set, HR = 0.42, 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.93, P = 0.027. Multivariable: comparable results]. The web-based tool has been deployed.
conclusionsOur model accurately predicts and stratifies OS in American and Chinese male patients with luminal early breast cancer. This risk stratification may aid in identifying low-risk candidates to omit ChT.
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.