ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Breast cancer recurrence risk prediction based on MIL.
Article in Frontiers in 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Predicting breast cancer recurrence risk is a critical clinical challenge. This study investigates the potential of computational pathology to stratify patients using deep learning on routine hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stained whole-slide images (WSIs). We developed and compared three multiple instance learning (MIL) frameworks-CLAM-SB, ABMIL, and ConvNeXt-MIL-XGBoost-on an in-house dataset of 210 patient cases. The models were trained to predict 5-year recurrence risk, categorized into three tiers (low, medium, high), with ground truth labels established by the 21-gene recurrence score. Features were extracted using the UNI and CONCH pre-trained models. In a 5-fold cross-validation, the modified CLAM-SB model achieved the strongest performance, achieving a mean area under the curve (AUC) of 0.836 and a classification accuracy of 76.2%. Our findings demonstrate the feasibility of using deep learning on standard histology slides for automated, genomics-correlated risk stratification, highlighting a promising pathway toward rapid and cost-effective clinical decision support.
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.