Subtypes of breast cancer show different spatial distributions of brain metastases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of our study was to test the hypothesis that the spatial distribution of breast cancer brain metastases (BM) differ according to their biological subtypes. MR images of 100 patients with BM from primary breast cancer were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided according to the biological subtype of the primary tumor, (triple-negative: 24, HER2 positive: 48, luminal: 28). All images marked with BMs were standardized to the human brain MRI atlas provided by the Montreal Neurological Institute 152 database. Distribution pattern of BM was evaluated with intra-group and intergroup analysis. In intra-group analysis, hot spots of metastases from triple-negative are evenly distributed in the brain, meanwhile BMs from HER2 positive and luminal type occur dominantly in occipital lobe and cerebellum. In intergroup analysis, BMs from triple-negative type occurred more often in frontal lobe, limbic region, and parietal lobe, compared with other types (P < .05). Breast cancer subtypes tend to demonstrate different spatial distributions of their BMs. These findings may have direct implications for dose modulation in prophylactic irradiation as well as for differential diagnoses. Thus, this result should be validated in future study with a larger population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".