ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Habitat imaging based on DCE-MRI for differentiating luminal and non-luminal subtypes of breast cancer: a two-center study.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To explore the application value of habitat imaging based on dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) for differentiating luminal and non-luminal subtypes of breast cancer (BC). Methods: Retrospective data from 396 BC patients across two centers were collected. The data from Center 1 were split into a training set of 220 patients and an internal validation set of 56 patients, while Center 2 provided an external test set of 120 patients. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for developing the clinical model. K-means algorithm was used to perform clustering on DCE-MRI. After feature extraction and selection, eight machine learning algorithms were utilized to build traditional radiomics model, habitat model, and clinical model. A stacking fusion strategy was employed to integrate the traditional radiomics model, habitat model, and clinical model for identifying luminal and non-luminal subtypes patients. Model performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curve and decision curve analysis (DCA). Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) was performed for model interpretability. Results: For the discrimination of breast cancer luminal and non-luminal subtypes, the stacking model yielded the largest area under the curve value (AUC = 0.840), followed by the habitat model and the conventional radiomics model (AUC = 0.830, AUC = 0.805, respectively), all of which were significantly better than the clinical model (p < 0.05, respectively). Calibration curves showed good calibration of the stacking model, and decision curves confirmed its favorable net clinical benefit. SHAP revealed habitat-LGBM in the stacking model with their contribution being particularly prominent. Conclusion: Habitat imaging exhibits promising potential to differentiate luminal and non-luminal breast cancer subtypes. The stacking model integrating habitat-LGBM, traditional radiomics-LGBM and clinical-XGBoost may provide favorable predictive performance.
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.