MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408142471 · doi:10.2196/54625

Predicting Overall Survival in Patients with Male Breast Cancer: Nomogram Development and External Validation Study

2025· article· en· W4408142471 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wen-Zhen Tang, Shutian Mo, Yuanliang Xie, Tianfu Wei, Guo-Lian Chen, Yanjuan Teng, Kui Jia

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Cancer · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMale Breast Health Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNomogramBreast cancerOncologyMedicineOverall survivalInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Male breast cancer (MBC) is an uncommon disease. Few studies have discussed the prognosis of MBC due to its rarity. Objective: This study aimed to develop a nomogram to predict the overall survival of patients with MBC and externally validate it using cases from China. Methods: Based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, male patients who were diagnosed with breast cancer between January 2010, and December 2015, were enrolled. These patients were randomly assigned to either a training set (n=1610) or a validation set (n=713) in a 7:3 ratio. Additionally, 22 MBC cases diagnosed at the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University between January 2013 and June 2021 were used for external validation, with the follow-up endpoint being June 10, 2023. Cox regression analysis was performed to identify significant risk variables and construct a nomogram to predict the overall survival of patients with MBC. Information collected from the test set was applied to validate the model. The concordance index (C-index), receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, decision curve analysis (DCA), and a Kaplan-Meier survival curve were used to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of the model. Results: A total of 2301 patients with MBC in the SEER database and 22 patients with MBC from the study hospital were included. The predictive model included 7 variables: age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.89, 95% CI 1.50-2.38), surgery (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.29-0.51), marital status (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.89), tumor stage (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.05-1.29), clinical stage (HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.15-1.74), chemotherapy (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.50-0.75), and HER2 status (HR 2.68, 95% CI 1.20-5.98). The C-index was 0.72, 0.747, and 0.981 in the training set, internal validation set, and external validation set, respectively. The nomogram showed accurate calibration, and the ROC curve confirmed the advantage of the model in clinical validity. The DCA analysis indicated that the model had good clinical applicability. Furthermore, the nomogram classification allowed for more accurate differentiation of risk subgroups, and patients with low-risk MBC demonstrated substantially improved survival outcomes compared with medium- and high-risk patients (P<.001). Conclusions: A survival prognosis prediction nomogram with 7 variables for patients with MBC was constructed in this study. The model can predict the survival outcome of these patients and provide a scientific basis for clinical diagnosis and 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR CancerSame topicMale Breast Health StudiesFrench-language works237,207