ArticleAmerican journal of cancer research2026
Machine learning-based quantitative pathology reveals intratumoral heterogeneity in ductal carcinoma
Article in American journal of cancer research, 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to develop a machine learning framework for objective ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) grading and to investigate intratumoral heterogeneity as a predictive biomarker. The grading framework was developed using 267 DCIS resections and validated on two external test sets (n=116 and n=69). A single-cell grading model graded individual nuclei using quantitative measures of nuclear size and pleomorphism. An integrated grading model then combined single-cell with architectural features in a support vector machine classifier. Separately, an invasion prediction model was trained on 288 intermediate- and high-grade DCIS cases and validated on 54 cases to predict upstaging to invasive carcinoma >1 mm. Compared to low-grade nuclei, high-grade nuclei were significantly larger and less uniformly oriented (all P<0.001). The single-cell grading model achieved F1 scores of 0.76, 0.62, and 0.80 for low-, intermediate-, and high-grade nuclei, respectively. In one external test set, the integrated grading model achieved F1 scores of 0.83, 0.71, and 0.72 for low-, intermediate-, and high-grade DCIS, respectively. On 54 intermediate- and high-grade DCIS biopsy cases, combining clinical variables with quantitative heterogeneity metrics improved the prediction of upstaging to invasive carcinoma >1 mm over the clinical-only model, increasing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve from 0.704 to 0.827. These findings identify quantitatively measured intratumoral heterogeneity as a biologically relevant feature that may explain diagnostic ambiguity in borderline cases and help predict extensive invasive upstaging.
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.