ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2026
Identification of chemotherapy-related risk factors for lymphedema in breast cancer patients using Lasso regression and model development.
Article in American journal of translational research, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to identify chemotherapy-related predictors of upper-limb breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) and to build and validate a clinically usable prediction model.
methodsOur multicenter study analyzed 670 breast cancer patients treated with chemotherapy from December 2018 through February 2024. We divided patients into training (381 patients, Gansu Provincial Cancer Hospital) and validation (289 patients, Zhangye Second People's Hospital) cohorts. The prediction model combined four machine learning algorithms - decision tree, random forest, support vector machine, and XGBoost-using Lasso regression as the final integrator. We employed K-fold cross-validation to prevent data leakage. Performance metrics included AUC, Brier score, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis. SHAP values helped us understand which factors mattered most. Variables showing P<0.10 in initial screening entered the multivariable model after checking for multicollinearity.
resultsEight factors showed preliminary associations with lymphedema by simple comparisons. However, comprehensive analysis accounting for overlapping effects identified six independent predictors: disease stage, complete versus limited axillary surgery, sentinel node procedure, total nodes removed, radiation treatment, and whether chemotherapy came before or after surgery. Statistical significance was strongest for stage (P<0.001) and weakest for chemotherapy timing (P=0.033). When we tested the model, discrimination remained good though slightly lower than development (AUC dropped from 0.773 to 0.713). Prediction errors stayed modest (Brier scores 0.136-0.146). Calibration was excellent since predicted probabilities matched observed rates. Clinical decision analysis suggested the model adds value when risk thresholds fall between 0-63%, peaking near 18-19% threshold. Feature importance analysis confirmed disease burden (stage, node count), and treatment aggressiveness (surgery type, radiation, chemotherapy sequence) jointly determined risk.
conclusionWe identified six factors that independently raise lymphedema risk after breast cancer treatment. The machine learning model we developed discriminates risk well enough for clinical application. It may help doctors intensify monitoring for high-risk patients while avoiding unnecessary intervention for low-risk patients.
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.