ArticleCommunications medicine2026
Machine learning identifies prognosticators of intracranial metastatic disease in patients with breast or lung cancer.
Article in Communications medicine, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntracranial metastatic disease is a severe complication of cancer that confers substantial morbidity and mortality. Patients with breast or lung cancer are at particularly elevated risk of IMD. Early identification of individuals at increased risk could enable targeted surveillance and timely intervention.
methodsWe developed interpretable machine-learning competing-risk models to estimate the risk of intracranial metastatic disease among patients with breast or lung cancer. For each cancer type, cause-specific Cox models were combined via the Aalen-Johansen estimator to produce absolute risk estimates at one, three, and five years.
resultsHere we show high test set discrimination for intracranial metastatic disease (Uno's C-index: breast 0.95; lung 0.88) and favorable time-dependent precision-recall performance (AUPRC(t) at 1/3/5 years: breast 0.17/0.53/0.63; lung 0.37/0.61/0.64). Decision-curve analysis across relevant thresholds demonstrates greater net clinical benefit than baseline strategies. Model interpretability analysis identifies cancer stage as the dominant determinant in both cancers; in breast cancer, triple-negative and HER2-positive subtypes contribute additional risk, whereas in lung cancer, histology and tumor size are prominent contributors.
conclusionsMachine-learning based competing-risk survival models offer greater insight into prognostication of intracranial metastatic disease than baseline strategies. These findings support the potential of such models to strengthen personalized risk stratification and guide targeted surveillance for Intracranial metastatic disease among patients with breast or lung cancer.
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.