ArticleDigital health
Interpretable machine learning for predicting cardiovascular-specific survival in breast cancer patients with second primary cancers: A SEER-based study.
Article in Digital health. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Cardiovascular disease constitutes the primary cause of mortality in long-term breast cancer (BC) survivors, yet predictive tools for cardiovascular-specific survival (CSS) in those with a second primary cancer (SPC) remain limited. This study aims to develop a machine learning (ML) model predicting CSS in BC patients with SPC (BC-SPC). Methods: Patients with BC-SPC diagnosed between 2010 and 2021 were identified from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) database. After screening variables through Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression, five predictive models were constructed respectively: extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), Cox proportional hazards model, random survival forest (RSF), DeepSurv, and support vector machine (SVM). Model performance was assessed using the concordance index (C-index), area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration curves and decision curve analysis (DCA). Performing SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis and visualization for the optimal model. Results: A total of 22,814 BC-SPC patients were included. Among these, 565 cardiovascular disease-specific deaths occurred, with cumulative incidence rates of 1.29%, 3.06%, and 4.30% at 5, 8, and 10 years, respectively. RSF demonstrated optimal performance, with a C-index of 0.749 in training set and 0.752 in validation set. Time-dependent AUCs at 5, 8, and 10 years were 0.774, 0.761, and 0.766 for the training set, and 0.752, 0.769, and 0.760 for the validation set, respectively. DCA indicated favorable net benefit across relevant thresholds. SHAP analysis revealed that age, radiation, marital status, chemotherapy, surgery, race, and sex are the key drivers in descending order of importance. Based on RSF risk scores, significant differences in CSS were observed among the groups (log-rank Conclusion: The RSF model with SHAP interpretation offers an accurate, user-friendly tool for individualized CSS prediction in BC- SPC and supports precision risk management.
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.