A priori prediction of breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy using quantitative ultrasound, texture derivative and molecular subtype
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the performances of the tumor response prediction prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy based on quantitative ultrasound, tumour core-margin, texture derivative analyses, and molecular parameters in a large cohort of patients (n = 208) with locally advanced and earlier-stage breast cancer and combined them to best determine tumour responses with machine learning approach. Two multi-features response prediction algorithms using a k-nearest neighbour and support vector machine were developed with leave-one-out and hold-out cross-validation methods to evaluate the performance of the response prediction models. In a leave-one-out approach, the quantitative ultrasound-texture analysis based model attained good classification performance with 80% of accuracy and AUC of 0.83. Including molecular subtype in the model improved the performance to 83% of accuracy and 0.87 of AUC. Due to limited number of samples in the training process, a model developed with a hold-out approach exhibited a slightly higher bias error in classification performance. The most relevant features selected in predicting the response groups are core-to-margin, texture-derivative, and molecular subtype. These results imply that that baseline tumour-margin, texture derivative analysis methods combined with molecular subtype can potentially be used for the prediction of ultimate treatment response in patients prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".