Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42811224›Full record

ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2026

Separating Ranking Signal, Incremental Feature Value, and Evaluation-Induced Optimism in Breast MRI Treatment-Effect Analysis: Foundation Model and Radiomic Representations.

Hisashi Nakano, Takehiro Shiinoki

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01042379 (I-SPY Trial), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT01042379 phase2recruitingnot on this map

I-SPY Trial (Investigation of Serial Studies to Predict Your Therapeutic Response With Imaging And moLecular Analysis 2)

TypeinterventionalSponsorQuantumLeap Healthcare CollaborativeRan2010 to 2031Enrolled5,000ConditionsBreast Neoplasms, Breast Cancer, Breast Tumors, AngiosarcomaArmsStandard Therapy, AMG 386 with or without Trastuzumab, AMG 479 (Ganitumab) plus Metformin, MK-2206 with or without Trastuzumab, AMG 386 and Trastuzumab
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Hisashi NakanoDepartment of Health Data Science, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, 1398 Shimamicho, Kita-ku, Niigata-shi, Niigata, Japan. hisashi-nakano@nuhw.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9023-880X
Takehiro ShiinokiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yamaguchi University, 1-1-1 Minamikogushi, Ube-shi, Yamaguchi, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0246-8489

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Treatment-effect prioritization, incremental imaging value, and evaluation-induced optimism require separate assessment. After a reproducibility audit identified a nonstandard ranking statistic, we reanalyzed pretreatment breast dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI from the randomized I-SPY2 cohort within MAMA-MIA using standard centered, doubly robust rank-weighted average treatment effect (RATE) analysis targeting the area under the targeting operator characteristic (AUTOC). The human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative cohort (n = 739) was randomly divided into training (n = 370) and independent evaluation (n = 369) sets. Six clinical, radiomic, and foundation-model configurations were evaluated against one common imaging-free doubly robust score, with half-sample bootstrap uncertainty. No configuration demonstrated treatment-effect prioritization after Holm adjustment across six tests. The historically designated clinical + radiomics + BiomedCLIP reference did not demonstrate statistically supported incremental RATE over clinical variables alone (difference, + 0.1132; 95% CI, - 0.0314 to + 0.2577; p = .125). Four sensitivity analyses likewise had confidence intervals that included zero. In a two-way split diagnostic, same-sample model development and evaluation increased apparent RATE in all six configurations and both evaluation halves; pooled increases ranged from + 0.1570 to + 0.2792. Preprocessing-placement contrasts reversed direction between evaluation halves, precluding a consistent directional conclusion. These findings do not establish incremental imaging value and do not demonstrate absence of treatment-effect heterogeneity. They support independent evaluation, uncertainty for direct feature comparisons, and clear separation of inferential results from descriptive diagnostics of evaluation reuse. Original trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01042379.

Indexed as

Breast cancerDynamic contrast-enhanced MRIFoundation modelsOut-of-fold evaluationTreatment-effect heterogeneityTreatment-effect ranking

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.