Machine learning analysis of breast ultrasound to classify triple negative and HER2+ breast cancer subtypes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Early diagnosis of triple-negative (TN) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive (HER2+) breast cancer is important due to its increased risk of micrometastatic spread necessitating early treatment and for guiding targeted therapies. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of machine learning (ML) classification of newly diagnosed breast masses into TN versus non-TN (NTN) and HER2+ versus HER2 negative (HER2-) breast cancer, using radiomic features extracted from grayscale ultrasound (US) b-mode images. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review identified 88 female patients who underwent diagnostic breast US imaging, had confirmation of invasive malignancy on pathology and receptor status determined on immunohistochemistry available. The patients were classified as TN, NTN, HER2+ or HER2- for ground-truth labelling. For image analysis, breast masses were manually segmented by a breast radiologist. Radiomic features were extracted per image and used for predictive modelling. Supervised ML classifiers included: logistic regression, k-nearest neighbour, and Naïve Bayes. Classification performance measures were calculated on an independent (unseen) test set. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity (%), and specificity (%) were reported for each classifier. RESULTS: The logistic regression classifier demonstrated the highest AUC: 0.824 (sensitivity: 81.8%, specificity: 74.2%) for the TN sub-group and 0.778 (sensitivity: 71.4%, specificity: 71.6%) for the HER2 sub-group. CONCLUSION: ML classifiers demonstrate high diagnostic accuracy in classifying TN versus NTN and HER2+ versus HER2- breast cancers using US images. Identification of more aggressive breast cancer subtypes early in the diagnostic process could help achieve better prognoses by prioritizing clinical referral and prompting adequate early treatment.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".