Knowledge Graph for Breast Cancer Prevention and Treatment: Literature-Based Data Analysis Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The incidence of breast cancer has remained high and continues to rise since the 21st century. Consequently, there has been a significant increase in research efforts focused on breast cancer prevention and treatment. Despite the extensive body of literature available on this subject, systematic integration is lacking. To address this issue, knowledge graphs have emerged as a valuable tool. By harnessing their powerful knowledge integration capabilities, knowledge graphs offer a comprehensive and structured approach to understanding breast cancer prevention and treatment. Objective: We aim to integrate literature data on breast cancer treatment and prevention, build a knowledge graph, and provide support for clinical decision-making. Methods: We used Medical Subject Headings terms to search for clinical trial literature on breast cancer prevention and treatment published on PubMed between 2018 and 2022. We downloaded triplet data from the Semantic MEDLINE Database (SemMedDB) and matched them with the retrieved literature to obtain triplet data for the target articles. We visualized the triplet information using NetworkX for knowledge discovery. Results: Within the scope of literature research in the past 5 years, malignant neoplasms appeared most frequently (587/1387, 42.3%). Pharmacotherapy (267/1387, 19.3%) was the primary treatment method, with trastuzumab (209/1805, 11.6%) being the most commonly used therapeutic drug. Through the analysis of the knowledge graph, we have discovered a complex network of relationships between treatment methods, therapeutic drugs, and preventive measures for different types of breast cancer. Conclusions: This study constructed a knowledge graph for breast cancer prevention and treatment, which enabled the integration and knowledge discovery of relevant literature in the past 5 years. Researchers can gain insights into treatment methods, drugs, preventive knowledge regarding adverse reactions to treatment, and the associations between different knowledge domains from the graph.
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 | 0.007 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.046 | 0.041 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".