ArticleBMC medical imaging2026
Deep learning radiomics based on preoperative multiparametric MRI in predicting breast cancer recurrence risk.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBreast cancer treatments are often tailored to recurrence risk to improve outcomes, but reliable risk stratification methods are lacking. PURPOSE: To predict preoperative breast cancer recurrence risk through a tridimensional synergy model integrating breast MRI, radiomics, and deep learning. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. POPULATION: 428 female patients were randomly divided into training (n = 299, 52.5 ± 12.2 years) and internal validation (n = 129, 53.2 ± 11.5 years) sets, with an external validation set of 196 patients (51.3 ± 11.2 years). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: Multiparametric 3T MRI included fat-suppressed T2-weighted (T2WI) spin-echo, axial diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) with one pre- and five post-contrast axial acquisitions. ASSESSMENT: We compared recurrence-free survival (RFS) prediction among DLR, DLC, and DLRC models, selected the optimal DLRC to stratify patients by risk, assessed RFS differences, and validated predictions, confirming effective risk stratification. STATISTICAL TESTS: Continuous corrected chi-squared tests, one-way ANOVA, log-rank test. A two-tailed P< 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsThe DL model showed predictive capability for 3-year RFS, with AUCs of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.65-0.84) in the training set, 0.74 (95% CI, 0.56-0.92) in the internal validation set, and 0.65 (95% CI, 0.53-0.78) in the external validation set. The DLR model achieved improved AUCs of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.74-0.90), 0.83 (95% CI: 0.73-0.93), and 0.67 (95% CI: 0.55-0.80) for predicting 3-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) in the training, internal validation, and external validation sets, respectively. The DLC model outperformed the DL model alone. The DLRC model achieved the best performance in the training and internal validation sets. Its predictive ability remained discernible but was attenuated in the external validation set, with AUCs of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.91-0.99), 0.89 (95% CI: 0.79-0.99), and 0.79 (95% CI: 0.67-0.91) across the respective datasets. DATA
conclusionThe DLRC model effectively predicted and stratified breast cancer recurrence risk by integrating deep learning, radiomics, and clinicopathological features. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 3. TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 5.
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.