Zie ook in gerelateerde artikelen hiernaast of hieronder.

Zie ook artikelen op onze website met AI = Artificial Intelligence = Kunstmatige Intelligentie: https://kanker-actueel.nl/NL/search.html?search_text=Artificial+Intelligence

Klik op MSK-IMPACT voor informatie over hoe het Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Cer kankerpatiënten volgt via een officieel goedgekeurde DNA 505 genentest hoe kankerpatiënten dus ook in onderstaand artikel beschreven borstkankerpatiënten het doen na of tijdens een behandeling. 

3 juli 2026: Bron: Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

Een Artificial Intelligence Machine learning model ontdekt meer hersenuitzaaiingen bij patiënten met uitgezaaide borstkanker  met een hoog risico op hersenmetastasen. De studie deed dit onderzoek bij patiënten met uitgezaaide borstkanker die binnen 6 maanden na hun diagnose in het Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York werden behandeld en binnen 1 jaar na de diagnose een MSK-IMPACT test op 505 genen van het extracraniaal weefsel ondergingen.

In totaal werden 1789 patiënten opgenomen in de uiteindelijke studiegroep. Van deze borstkankerpatiënten ontwikkelden 359 patiënten uitzaaiingen in de hersenen. Deze patiënten waren doorgaans jonger en hadden vaker een hooggradige histologie en borstkanker met HER2-positief of triple-negatieveborstkanker.
Klinisch-pathologische en genomische gegevens van de volledige studiegrtoep werden geïntegreerd en verwerkt voor het machine learning modelontwikkeling. De studiegroep werd vervolgens opgesplitst in een trainingsset (70%) en een interne validatieset (30%).

Resultaten

De overleving zonder hersenmetastasen verschilde significant tussen de drie risicogroepen. Na 2 jaar was de overleving zonder uitzaaiingen in de hersen 95% in de laag risicogroep, 90% in de intermediaire risicogroep en 75% in de hoogrisicogroep. Vergeleken met de laagrisicogroep had de intermediaire risicogroep een hazard ratio (HR) van 2,63 (95% betrouwbaarheidsinterval = 1,70–4,05; P < 0,001), terwijl de hoogrisicogroep een HR had van 7,62 (95% BI = 5,11–11,37; P < 0,001).
Vergelijkbare resultaten werden waargenomen in de interne validatiegroep. Vergeleken met de groep met een laag risico had de groep met een gemiddeld risico een HR van 3,07 (95% CI = 1,54–6,12; P = 0,001), terwijl de groep met een hoog risico een HR van 8,97 had (95% CI = 4,48–15,33; P < 0,001).

Het abstract van de studie werd gepresneteerd op ASCO 2026 maar is als volledig studieverslag te lezen of te downloaden in . 2026 Apr 8;13:1693557

An actionable machine learning–driven clinicogenomic model as a predictor of brain metastasis risk in breast cancer.

Luke Pike

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY


Background:Brain metastasis (BM) is a frequent site of disease progression for patients living with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Guidelines do not recommend routine MRI brain surveillance in asymptomatic patients. Consequently, patients with MBC who develop BM often present with extensive disease, leading to lasting neurological damage or death.

Methods:This study included MBC patients without known BM at presentation who underwent genomic sequencing of a non-BM specimen with MSK-IMPACT, a custom tumor-normal next-generation sequencing assay, within one year of M1 diagnosis. We developed an ensemble time-dependent LASSO machine learning (ML) model with BM-free survival (BMFS) as the primary endpoint, integrating baseline clinical, pathologic, and genomic features for risk stratification, using a cross-validation framework. Benchmarking was conducted using a time-dependent neural network designed to model competing risks (DeepHit), and further validation was performed using an independent clinical trial dataset.

Results:1594 MBC patients were divided into a training set (n=1118) and a test set (n=476), with 320 events over a median follow-up of 39.7 months. The ensemble ML model identified distinct clinicogenomic features associated with shorter BMFS, including receptor subtype, ER/PR percent positivity, menopausal status, metastatic burden, metastatic site distribution, disease-free interval, and alterations in TP53, ERBB2, and RB1. The model stratified patients into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups (training C-index: 0.690; test C-index: 0.696). In the test cohort, 24-month BMFS was 68%, 89%, and 98% in high, intermediate, and low risk groups (HR 19.2, p<0.001 high vs. low risk; HR 6.5, p<0.001 intermediate vs. low risk), with model predictions retaining robust predictive ability beyond 24 months (time-dependent AUC at 10 years of 0.79). These results were confirmed using DeepHit, a competing-risk-specific neural network (training C-index 0.71; test C-index 0.61). The model similarly identified high-risk patients within a single-arm phase II clinical trial dataset utilizing MRI screening in patients with MBC.

Conclusions:We developed an actionable ML-driven clinicogenomic model that accurately identifies MBC patients at high risk of developing BM. Biologically plausible and readily available features defined a high-risk patient category with a >30% risk of developing BM within 2 years and would likely benefit from MRI screening. The results will be prospectively validated in BRAINSTORM (Breast Cancer Radiologic Assessment and Intervention for Neurological Surveillance, Tracking, and Optimized Risk Management), a phase II randomized clinical trial of intensified MRI surveillance versus standard symptom-based screening in high-risk MBC patients.
Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2026 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org


On this page

Funding Statement

The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This work was supported by the Hengrui Hebei Innovation and Development Medical Cooperation Project (HR202502023).

Footnotes

Edited by: Alberto Traverso, San Raffaele Hospital (IRCCS), Italy

Reviewed by: Marco Diego Dominietto, Gate To Brain SA, Switzerland

Sajjad Karim, King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia

Wenhai Zhang, Guangxi Medical University Cancer Hospital, China

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Author contributions

HW: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. HZ: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology, Project administration, Software, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. MC: Data curation, Investigation, Software, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. JC: Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. BQ: Methodology, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. CY: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Software, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. CG: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2026.1693557/full#supplementary-material

Table_1.xlsx (11.9MB, xlsx)
Table_2.xlsx (58.1KB, xlsx)

References

  • 1.Harbeck N, Gnant M. Breast cancer. Lancet. (2017) 389:1134–50. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31891-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Zimmer A. Triple-negative breast cancer central nervous system metastases from the laboratory to the clinic. Cancer J. (2021) 27:76–82. 10.1097/PPO.0000000000000503 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Kuksis M, Gao Y, Tran W, Hoey C, Kiss A, Komorowski A, et al. The incidence of brain metastases among patients with metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuro Oncol. (2021) 23:894–904. 10.1093/neuonc/noaa285 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Yakar M, Etiz D. Prognostic factors of breast cancer brain metastasis. World J Clin Oncol. (2024) 15:5–8. 10.5306/wjco.v15.i1.5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Lin N, Claus E, Sohl J, Razzak A, Arnaout A, Winer E. Sites of distant recurrence and clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: high incidence of central nervous system metastases. Cancer. (2008) 113:2638–45. 10.1002/cncr.23930 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Cacho-Díaz B, Meneses-García A, Valdés-Ferrer S, Reynoso-Noverón N. A brain metastasis prediction model in women with breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol. (2023) 86:102448. 10.1016/j.canep.2023.102448 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Xu C, Coen-Pirani P, Jiang X. Empirical study of overfitting in deep learning for predicting breast cancer metastasis. Cancers. (2023) 15:1969. 10.3390/cancers15071969 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Li C, Liu M, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Li J, Sun S, et al. Novel models by machine learning to predict prognosis of breast cancer brain metastases. J Transl Med. (2023) 21:404. 10.1186/s12967-023-04277-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Raghavendra A, Nuhad K. Breast cancer brain metastasis: a comprehensive review. JCO Oncol Pract. (2024) 10:1348–59. 10.1200/OP.23.00794 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Xiong Y, Cao H, Zhang Y, Pan Z, Dong S, Wang G, et al. Nomogram-predicted survival of breast cancer brain metastasis: a SEER-based population study. World Neurosurg. (2019) 128:e823–34. 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.04.262 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Earla J, Kponee-Shovein K, Kurian A, Mahendran M, Song Y, Hua Q, et al. Real-world perioperative treatment patterns and economic burden of recurrence in early-stage HER2-negative breast cancer: a SEER-Medicare study. J Med Econ. (2025) 28:54–69. 10.1080/13696998.2024.2439228 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Duggan M, Anderson W, Altekruse S, Penberthy L, Sherman M. The surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) program and pathology: toward strengthening the critical relationship. Am J Surg Pathol. (2016) 40:e94–102. 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000749 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Li Z, Hong Q, Ni Z, Guo Z, Shi Q, Wang X, et al. A novel nomogram for prediction of survival in patients with small isolated hepatocellular carcinoma: a population-based and externally validated study. J Invest Surg. (2025) 38:2536627. 10.1080/08941939.2025.2536627 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Sun M, Yun Y, Liu H, Yu Z, Yang F, Xu L. Brain metastasis in de novo breast cancer: an updated population-level study from SEER database. Asian J Surg. (2022) 45:2259–67. 10.1016/j.asjsur.2021.12.037 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Gokul Thilaak P, Malathi G, Thiagarajan D. mModPoEs: multimodal posture estimation and feedback-driven correction of load-bearing human movements using wearable sensors and computer vision. J Orthop. (2025) 73:101–9. 10.1016/j.jor.2025.12.024 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Molnar D, Knuuti J, Bax J, Saraste A, Maaniitty T. Sex differences in plaque burden and outcomes in symptomatic patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Int J Cardiol. (2026) 444:134023. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2025.134023 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Wang Y, Fang L, Liu Q, Wu T, Su Z, Deng W, et al. Prediction model for cardiovascular mortality risk in asthma patients based on machine learning. J Asthma. (2026): 10.1080/02770903.2026.2618108 Online ahead of print. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Ramamurthy P, Han Z, Delen D, Miao Z, Gin A, Luo X, et al. Graph attention network with comorbidity connectivity embedding for post-traumatic epilepsy risk prediction using sparse time-series electronic health records. Int J Med Inform. (2026) 208:106239. 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2025.106239 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Zhu Z, Li Q, Chen W, Sun P, Li X, Yang Y, et al. Development and validation of an interpretable Random Forest model for predicting recurrence after endoscopic submucosal dissection in superficial oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Ann Med. (2026) 58:2606571. 10.1080/07853890.2025.2606571 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Song S, Leng F, Fang M, An X, Cai Y. Mung bean seed classification based on multimodal features and Kepler-optimized stacking ensemble learning model. PLoS One. (2026) 21:e0338928. 10.1371/journal.pone.0338928 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Si Y, Abdollahi A, Ashrafi N, Placencia G, Pishgar E, Alaei K, et al. Optimized feature selection and advanced machine learning for stroke risk prediction in revascularized coronary artery disease patients. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. (2025) 25:276. 10.1186/s12911-025-03116-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Qiu B, Su X, Qin X, Wang Q. Application of machine learning techniques in real-world research to predict the risk of liver metastasis in rectal cancer. Front Oncol. (2022) 12:1065468. 10.3389/fonc.2022.1065468 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Lan A, Li H, Chen J, Shen M, Jin Y, Dai Y, et al. Nomograms for predicting disease-free survival based on core needle biopsy and surgical specimens in female breast cancer patients with non-pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Pers Med. (2023) 13:249. 10.3390/jpm13020249 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Guldogan E, Yagin F, Ucuzal H, Alzakari S, Alhussan A, Ardigò L. Interpretable machine learning for serum-based metabolomics in breast cancer diagnostics: insights from multi-objective feature selection-driven LightGBM-SHAP models. Medicina. (2025) 61:1112. 10.3390/medicina61061112 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Gao Y, Wang J, Tao W, Wang S, Xie H, Duan R, et al. Developing a prognostic nomogram for primary thyroid lymphoma: insights from a large retrospective study. Discov Oncol. (2025) 16:472. 10.1007/s12672-025-02211-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Zeng J, Zeng J, Liu J, Zeng J. Development of pre and post-operative nomograms to predict individual survival for ideal liver resection candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver Int. (2021) 41:2974–85. 10.1111/liv.15042 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Yuan Q, Ye R, Qian Y, Yu H, Zhou Y, Cui X, et al. Machine learning and SHAP value interpretation for predicting the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and long-term clinical outcomes in Chinese female breast cancer. Ann Med. (2025) 57:2541316. 10.1080/07853890.2025.2541316 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Daniels J, Kyei K, Walubo R, Nyantakyi A, Ayabilah E, Tackie J. Prevalence and clinicopathological characteristics of breast cancer patients with brain metastases in Ghana: a single-center cross-sectional study. PLoS One. (2025) 20:e0329308. 10.1371/journal.pone.0329308 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Wasilewski D, Shaked Z, Fuchs A, Roohani S, Xu R, Schlaak M, et al. Re-resection of brain metastases - outcomes of an institutional cohort study and literature review. BMC Cancer. (2025) 25:973. 10.1186/s12885-025-13677-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Hintelmann K, Wahaj S, Henze M, Laakmann E, Müller V, Krug D, et al. Radiotherapy in breast cancer brain metastases: the impact of time interval and disease dynamics when breast cancer seeds to the brain. Strahlenther Onkol. (2025) 201:606–15. 10.1007/s00066-025-02378-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Terceiro L, Ikeogu N, Lima M, Edechi C, Nickel B, Fischer G, et al. Navigating the blood-brain barrier: challenges and therapeutic strategies in breast cancer brain metastases. Int J Mol Sci. (2023) 24:12034. 10.3390/ijms241512034 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Zhang M, Deng H, Hu R, Chen F, Dong S, Zhang S, et al. Patterns and prognostic implications of distant metastasis in breast cancer based on SEER population data. Sci Rep. (2025) 15:26717. 10.1038/s41598-025-12883-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Duchnowska R, Jassem J, Goswami C, Dundar M, Gökmen-Polar Y, Li L, et al. Predicting early brain metastases based on clinicopathological factors and gene expression analysis in advanced HER2-positive breast cancer patients. J Neurooncol. (2015) 122:205–16. 10.1007/s11060-014-1704-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Joshi V, Beecher K, Lim M, Stacey A, Feng Y, Jat P, et al. B7-H3 expression in breast cancer and brain metastasis. Int J Mol Sci. (2024) 25:3976. 10.3390/ijms25073976 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Cao T, Dixit K, Santa-Maria C, Kumthekar P. Factors affecting time to brain metastases for stage 2 and 3 breast cancer patients: a large single-institutional analysis with potential screening implications. Neurooncol Adv. (2021) 3:vdab009. 10.1093/noajnl/vdab009 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Wu S, Li H, Tang L, Sun J, Zhang W, Li F, et al. The effect of distant metastases sites on survival in de novo stage-IV breast cancer: a SEER database analysis. Tumour Biol. (2017) 39:1010428317705082. 10.1177/1010428317705082 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Wang Y, Xu H, Sa Q, Li L, Han Y, Wu Y, et al. Development of graded prognostic assessment for breast Cancer brain metastasis incorporating extracranial metastatic features: a retrospective analysis of 284 patients. BMC Cancer. (2024) 24:1262. 10.1186/s12885-024-12983-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Xu D, Hu Z, Wang K, Hu S, Zhou Y, Zhang S, et al. Why does HER2-positive breast cancer metastasize to the brain and what can we do about it? Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. (2024) 195:104269. 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2024.104269 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Hung M, Liu C, Shiau C, Hsu C, Tsai Y, Wang Y, et al. Effect of age and biological subtype on the risk and timing of brain metastasis in breast cancer patients. PLoS One. (2014) 9:e89389. 10.1371/journal.pone.0089389 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Murthy R, Loi S, Okines A, Paplomata E, Hamilton E, Hurvitz S, et al. Tucatinib, trastuzumab, and capecitabine for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. N Engl J Med. (2020) 382:597–609. 10.1056/NEJMoa1914609 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.von Arx C, Calderaio C, Calabrese A, Marciano B, Martinelli C, Di Lauro V, et al. The multidisciplinary management of HER2-positive breast cancer brain metastases: from new biological insights to future therapeutic options. Front Oncol. (2024) 14:1447508. 10.3389/fonc.2024.1447508 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Ahire A, Zade N, Mujawar U, Mehta D, Kotecha K. Meteorological drought severity forecasting utilizing blended modelling. MethodsX. (2025) 15:103456. 10.1016/j.mex.2025.103456 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Table_1.xlsx (11.9MB, xlsx)
Table_2.xlsx (58.1KB, xlsx)

Data A


Plaats een reactie ...

Reageer op "Artificial Intelligence machine learning-model identificeert meer patiënten met uitgezaaide borstkanker met een hoog risico op hersenuitzaaiingen in vergelijking met andere manieren van dianosticeren"


Gerelateerde artikelen
 

Gerelateerde artikelen

ASCO 2026: Nieuw onderzoek >> Studiepublicaties van niet-toxische >> ESMO 2023: aanbevolen abstracten >> ASCO 2024: aanbevolen abstracten >> 177Lu-FAP-2286 geeft uitstekende >> Algemeen: Borstkanker korte >> Anbenitamab plus docetaxel >> Aprepitant, een antibraak >> Arimidex - anastrozole informatie >> Arimidex: 2 jaar aromataseremmers >>