ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Predictive modeling of axillary web syndrome in Chinese postoperative breast cancer patients using interpretable machine learning.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
Objective: This study aimed to develop and validate a series of risk prediction models for axillary web syndrome (AWS) after breast cancer surgery using machine learning algorithms, enabling postoperative risk identification to facilitate timely targeted interventions. Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary cancer hospital between April 2021 and July 2024. After collecting clinical data, the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression was employed to screen variables with predictive value for AWS. The dataset was randomly divided into a development set and a test set at a 7:3 ratio. Nine classification models were constructed, and their performance was evaluated based on accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and area under the curve (AUC). The optimal model was selected according to the AUC value. Model interpretation was performed using SHAP analysis and feature importance ranking. Results: A total of 655 patients were included, with 459 in the development set and 196 in the test set. The AWS incidence rate was 26.9% (176 cases). LASSO regression identified 14 most predictive features, and SHAP value analysis revealed that lymph node surgical approach and lymphedema were the most critical variables. The logistic regression (LR) model demonstrated the best overall predictive performance (AUC = 0.72). Conclusion: This study confirmed that the LR model exhibited superior accuracy and AUC value combinations, effectively identifying high-risk AWS patients. The findings provide a basis for clinical practitioners to identify high-risk patients and implement targeted interventions.
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.