» Articles » PMID: 37761908

Predicting Patterns of Distant Metastasis in Breast Cancer Patients Following Local Regional Therapy Using Machine Learning

Abstract

Up to 30% of breast cancer (BC) patients will develop distant metastases (DM), for which there is no cure. Here, statistical and machine learning (ML) models were developed to estimate the risk of site-specific DM following local-regional therapy. This retrospective study cohort included 175 patients diagnosed with invasive BC who later developed DM. Clinicopathological information was collected for analysis. Outcome variables were the first site of metastasis (brain, bone or visceral) and the time interval (months) to developing DM. Multivariate statistical analysis and ML-based multivariable gradient boosting machines identified factors associated with these outcomes. Machine learning models predicted the site of DM, demonstrating an area under the curve of 0.74, 0.75, and 0.73 for brain, bone and visceral sites, respectively. Overall, most patients (57%) developed bone metastases, with increased odds associated with estrogen receptor (ER) positivity. Human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) positivity and non-anthracycline chemotherapy regimens were associated with a decreased risk of bone DM, while brain metastasis was associated with ER-negativity. Furthermore, non-anthracycline chemotherapy alone was a significant predictor of visceral metastasis. Here, clinicopathologic and treatment variables used in ML prediction models predict the first site of metastasis in BC. Further validation may guide focused patient-specific surveillance practices.

Citing Articles

Editorial for the Special Issue: Bioinformatics and Computational Biology for Cancer Prediction and Prognosis.

Dancik G, Vlahopoulos S Genes (Basel). 2025; 16(2).

PMID: 40004496 PMC: 11855721. DOI: 10.3390/genes16020167.


Leveraging survival analysis and machine learning for accurate prediction of breast cancer recurrence and metastasis.

Noman S, Fadel Y, Henedak M, Attia N, Essam M, Elmaasarawii S Sci Rep. 2025; 15(1):3728.

PMID: 39880868 PMC: 11779859. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-87622-3.


PET Molecular Imaging in Breast Cancer: Current Applications and Future Perspectives.

Katal S, McKay M, Taubman K J Clin Med. 2024; 13(12).

PMID: 38929989 PMC: 11205053. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13123459.

References
1.
De Placido S, De Angelis C, Giuliano M, Pizzi C, Ruocco R, Perrone V . Imaging tests in staging and surveillance of non-metastatic breast cancer: changes in routine clinical practice and cost implications. Br J Cancer. 2017; 116(6):821-827. PMC: 5355929. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2017.24. View

2.
Wolff A, Hammond M, Allison K, Harvey B, Mangu P, Bartlett J . Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Testing in Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Clinical Practice Guideline Focused Update. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2018; 142(11):1364-1382. DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2018-0902-SA. View

3.
Zhang H, Lin X, Huang Y, Wang M, Cen C, Tang S . Detection Methods and Clinical Applications of Circulating Tumor Cells in Breast Cancer. Front Oncol. 2021; 11:652253. PMC: 8208079. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.652253. View

4.
Kalli S, Semine A, Cohen S, Naber S, Makim S, Bahl M . American Joint Committee on Cancer's Staging System for Breast Cancer, Eighth Edition: What the Radiologist Needs to Know. Radiographics. 2018; 38(7):1921-1933. DOI: 10.1148/rg.2018180056. View

5.
Liang Y, Zhang H, Song X, Yang Q . Metastatic heterogeneity of breast cancer: Molecular mechanism and potential therapeutic targets. Semin Cancer Biol. 2019; 60:14-27. DOI: 10.1016/j.semcancer.2019.08.012. View