ArticleCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2026
Ultrasound and Clinicopathological Features-Based Machine Learning Model for Predicting Neoadjuvant Therapy Efficacy in Breast Cancer.
Article in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
backgroundAccurate prediction of pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) remains challenging in breast cancer. Conventional imaging modalities, such as ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), have limited accuracy when used alone.
aimsTo develop and validate a machine learning model integrating ultrasound imaging features and clinicopathological information for non-invasive and individualized prediction of pCR following NAT in breast cancer patients. METHODS AND
resultsThis retrospective study included 609 breast cancer patients who underwent NAT. Ultrasound imaging features and clinicopathological variables were collected and analyzed. Data preprocessing was performed using Python and R. The diagnostic performance of ultrasound and MRI for predicting pCR was evaluated as a baseline. Significant predictors were identified through univariate and multivariate analyses. Three machine learning models-Random Forest, Logistic Regression, and Support Vector Machine-were developed and validated. Model performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and decision curve analysis, while SHAP analysis and feature importance rankings were used to evaluate variable contributions. The Random Forest model achieved the best performance, with an AUC of 0.85 and an accuracy of 84.7%, outperforming conventional imaging assessments. Key predictors included early NAT tumor volume reduction ≥ 80%, increased echogenicity, HER2 positivity, and higher tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte levels.
conclusionThe Random Forest model substantially improved prediction of pCR after NAT in breast cancer and may provide a practical, non-invasive tool to support individualized treatment planning, and clinical decision-making.
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.