ArticleBMC cancer2026
Breast cancer survival prediction using machine learning and multimodal data for personalized care plan.
Article in BMC cancer, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper presents a time-stratified breast cancer survival analysis that incorporates tumor characteristics, disease stage, and patient features, using machine learning (ML) algorithms to support personalized care planning. Considering nonlinear relationships between input data and the risk of death, as well as the dynamics of patient characteristics over time, we utilize 6 ML algorithms, including XGBoost, Logistic Regression, Random Forest, Decision Tree, AdaBoost, and Multilayer Perceptron, for less than 6 months, 6 months, 1-, 2-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year survival rates prediction. We utilize multimodal data from 3,476 breast cancer patients, comprising 43 features. XGBoost outperforms the rest, achieving an accuracy of over 90%. The top five predictors, using Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), include DCIS, Ki-67, age, feeding, and lymph node grade. SHAP analysis indicated that lower values of DCIS and Ki-67, lower lymph node and tumor grade, less sentinel lymph node involvement, higher age, longer duration of breastfeeding, lower tumor size, medullary tumor type, PR+, ER+, less positive node, more pregnancy, DCIS pathology class, BCS surgery type for early-stage, lower tumor stage, no necrosis, HER2-, no family history, and no calcification are result in longer breast cancer survival. Furthermore, we validate the model's performance using 5-fold cross-validation (CV) and nested CV. We also evaluate model performance using accuracy, precision, F1 score, and recall. All results show the proposed method outperforms. This paper presents clinical, molecular, and demographic insights into survival analysis, utilizing explainable ML techniques to support personalized treatment decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.