切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华医学超声杂志(电子版) ›› 2026, Vol. 23 ›› Issue (02) : 112 -123. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1672-6448.2026.02.002

浅表器官超声影像学

超声瘤内、瘤周影像组学联合临床特征构建列线图模型评估乳腺癌新辅助化疗效果
袁智帆1, 刘锦辉1, 丁尚伟2, 周大治2, 陈俊君1, 何志忠1, 陈沛芬1, 冷晓玲1,()   
  1. 1 523000 广东东莞,南方医科大学第十附属医院超声科
    2 511436 广州医科大学附属第一医院超声科
  • 收稿日期:2026-01-03 出版日期:2026-02-01
  • 通信作者: 冷晓玲
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(82360362); 新疆维吾尔自治区杰出青年基金项目(2022D01E77)

Diagnostic value of conventional ultrasound-based radiomics models for pathological subtyping of renal cell carcinoma

Zhifan Yuan1, Jinhui Liu1, Shangwei Ding2, Dazhi Zhou2, Junjun Chen1, Zhizhong He1, Peifen Chen1, Xiaoling Leng1,()   

  1. 1 Ultrasound Department of the Tenth Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University Dongguan People's Hospital, Dongguan 523000, China
    2 Ultrasound Department of the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 511436, China
  • Received:2026-01-03 Published:2026-02-01
  • Corresponding author: Xiaoling Leng
引用本文:

袁智帆, 刘锦辉, 丁尚伟, 周大治, 陈俊君, 何志忠, 陈沛芬, 冷晓玲. 超声瘤内、瘤周影像组学联合临床特征构建列线图模型评估乳腺癌新辅助化疗效果[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2026, 23(02): 112-123.

Zhifan Yuan, Jinhui Liu, Shangwei Ding, Dazhi Zhou, Junjun Chen, Zhizhong He, Peifen Chen, Xiaoling Leng. Diagnostic value of conventional ultrasound-based radiomics models for pathological subtyping of renal cell carcinoma[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2026, 23(02): 112-123.

目的

探讨基于新辅助化疗(NAC)前及2周期NAC后常规超声图像的瘤内、瘤周影像组学特征联合临床病理因素构建的列线图模型,对乳腺癌NAC后病理完全缓解(pCR)的预测价值。​

方法

回顾性收集2019年7月1日至2023年12月1日南方医科大学第十附属医院332例经病理证实、并接受标准6周期NAC的女性乳腺癌患者资料。所有患者均在NAC治疗前及第2周期NAC治疗后进行了超声检查,用于本次疗效的早期预测研究。将患者按7∶3的比例随机分为训练集(233例)和验证集(99例)。在NAC前及2周期NAC后超声图像上勾画瘤内区域及瘤周1 mm、2 mm、3 mm区域,提取影像组学特征,通过组内相关系数(ICC)评估特征稳定性,经Student t检验、皮尔逊相关系数和LASSO回归筛选特征,采用分类梯度提升(CatBoost)、轻量级梯度提升机(LightGBM)、逻辑回归(LR)、随机森林(RF)、支持向量机(SVM)、极端梯度提升(XGBoost)6种机器学习方法分别构建NAC前影像组学模型(RS1)以及2周期NAC后影像组学模型(RS2);通过多因素Logistic回归分析筛选临床独立预测因素并构建临床模型;将最佳影像组学模型与临床独立预测因素结合构建联合模型,进一步基于最优模型构建列线图。通过受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线、校准曲线和临床决策分析(DCA)曲线评估模型效能。​

结果

雌激素受体(ER)、孕激素受体(PR)、人表皮生长因子受体2(Her-2)、Ki-67为pCR的临床独立预测因子(OR=0.461,95%CI:0.218~0.978,P=0.044;OR=0.414,95%CI:0.207~0.829,P=0.013;OR=1.893,95%CI:1.417~2.530,P<0.001;OR=5.178,95%CI:1.488~18.022,P=0.010),以ER、PR、Her-2、Ki-67构建临床模型,该模型在验证集中预测pCR的ROC曲线下面积(AUC)为0.797。影像组学模型中,NAC前最佳模型为瘤内+瘤周2 mm区域的RS1XGBoost(AUC=0.726),2周期NAC后最佳模型为瘤周2 mm区域的RS2SVM(AUC=0.770)。将临床独立预测因子(ER、PR、Her-2、Ki-67)分别与RS1XGBoost及RS2SVM结合构建联合模型,联合模型预测性能显著优于单一模型,NAC前联合模型预测pCR的AUC为0.842,2周期NAC后联合模型预测pCR的AUC为0.864;DCA曲线表明,两模型在阈值概率范围为6.7%~90.4%、5.6%~94.1%内均能提供临床净获益,曲线下面积分别为0.092和0.116;校准曲线分析显示,预测概率与实际概率一致,模型校准度良好(P=0.48)。基于预测效能最优的2周期NAC后联合模型构建列线图,列线图C指数为0.866。

结论

基于NAC后超声影像组学特征联合临床病理因素构建的列线图模型能有效预测乳腺癌NAC疗效,尤其2周期NAC后瘤周2 mm区域的影像组学特征结合临床指标构建的模型可提供更精准的预测效能,为个体化治疗决策提供重要参考。

Objective

To investigate the predictive value of a nomogram model that integrates intratumoral and peritumoral radiomic features derived from conventional ultrasound images obtained before and after two cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), along with clinicopathological factors, for assessing pathological complete response (pCR) in breast cancer patients following NAC.

Methods

A total of 332 female patients with pathologically confirmed breast cancer who received a standard six-cycle neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) regimen at the Tenth Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University between July 1, 2019 and December 1, 2023 were retrospectively enrolled. All patients underwent ultrasound examinations before NAC initiation and after the second cycle of NAC, and these imaging data were used for early treatment response prediction. Patients were randomly divided into a training cohort (n=233) and a validation cohort (n=99) at a 7∶3 ratio. Intratumoral regions and peritumoral areas at 1 mm, 2 mm, and 3 mm margins were delineated on ultrasound images obtained before NAC and after two cycles of NAC. Radiomic features were extracted, and their stability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Stable features were selected via Student's t-test, Pearson correlation analysis, and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression. Six machine learning algorithms—CatBoost, LightGBM, logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), and XGBoost—were used to construct radiomics models. Independent clinical predictors were identified by multivariate logistic regression to build a clinical model. The optimal radiomics model was then combined with clinical predictors to establish a combined model, which was visualized as a nomogram. Model performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA).

Results

In the clinical model, estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), Her-2, and Ki-67 were identified as independent predictors of pCR, yielding an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.797 in the validation cohort. Among the radiomics models, the optimal pre-NAC model was the RSXGBoost model based on intratumoral and peritumoral (2-mm margin) features (AUC = 0.726), while the optimal post–two-cycle NAC model was the RSSVM model based on peritumoral (2-mm margin) features (AUC = 0.770). The combined models demonstrated superior predictive performance compared with the single models, achieving AUCs of 0.842 before NAC and 0.864 after two NAC cycles. DCA demonstrated that both combined models provided clinical net benefit across threshold probability ranges of 6.7%–90.4% and 5.6%–94.1%, respectively, with area under the decision curve (AUDC) values of 0.092 and 0.116, respectively. Calibration curves indicated good agreement between predicted and observed outcomes (P=0.48). The nomogram achieved a concordance index (C-index) of 0.866.

Conclusion

The nomogram model integrating post-NAC ultrasound radiomic features with clinicopathological factors effectively predicts the therapeutic response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Notably, radiomic features from the peritumoral 2-mm region after two NAC cycles, when combined with clinical indicators, provide enhanced predictive accuracy and offer valuable guidance for individualized treatment decision-making.

图1 女性乳腺癌患者新辅助化疗前非完全病理缓解(pCR)组超声图像(图a~d)及pCR组超声图像(图e~h)勾画示意图。图a、e为瘤内区域分割图像,图b、f为瘤周1 mm区域分割图像,图c、g为瘤周2 mm区域分割图像,图d、h为瘤周3 mm区域分割图像
表1 接受新辅助化疗的女性乳腺癌患者基线特征比较
临床超声特征 训练集(233例) 验证集(99例) 统计值 P
病理情况[例(%)] χ2=0.241 0.624
非pCR 164(70.4) 67(67.7)
pCR 69(29.6) 32(32.3)
年龄(岁,
±s
48.5±11.2 49.1±10.4 t=-0.405 0.685
绝经状态[例(%)] χ2=0.083 0.773
142(60.9) 62(62.6)
91(39.1) 37(37.4)
体质量[kg,MQ1Q3)] 58.0(52.0,64.0) 57.0(52.5,62.8) W=11756.500 0.781
身高[m,MQ1Q3)] 1.6(1.5,1.6) 1.6(1.5,1.6) W=11656.000 0.879
BMI[kg/m2MQ1Q3)] 23.4(21.4,26.0) 23.4(21.6,25.7) W=11494.500 0.962
T分期[例(%)] χ2=1.831 0.608
Ⅰ期 8(3.4) 6(6.1)
Ⅱ期 174(74.7) 68(68.7)
Ⅲ期 28(12.0) 14(14.1)
Ⅳ期 23(9.9) 11(11.1)
N分期[例(%)] χ2=2.708 0.439
0期 66(28.3) 24(24.2)
Ⅰ期 124(53.2) 49(49.5)
Ⅱ期 26(11.2) 15(15.2)
Ⅲ期 17(7.3) 11(11.1)
组织学分级[例(%)] χ2=2.913 0.233
Ⅰ级 12(5.2) 10(10.1)
Ⅱ级 182(78.1) 75(75.8)
Ⅲ级 39(16.7) 14(14.1)
ER[例(%)] χ2=0.452 0.502
阴性 69(29.6) 33(33.3)
阳性 164(70.4) 66(66.7)
PR[例(%)] χ2=0.389 0.533
阴性 88(37.8) 41(41.4)
阳性 145(62.2) 58(58.6)
Her-2[例(%)] χ2=5.486 0.139
- 38(16.3) 8(8.1)
1+ 35(15.0) 17(17.2)
2+ 85(36.5) 33(33.3)
3+ 75(32.2) 41(41.4)
Ki-67[%,MQ1Q3)] 0.4(0.3,0.6) 0.4(0.2,0.6) W=11850.000 0.691
分子分型[例(%)] χ2=1.968 0.579
LuminalA型 19(8.2) 10(10.1)
LuminalB型 91(39.1) 45(45.5)
Her-2过表达型 16(6.9) 6(6.1)
三阴性 107(45.9) 38(38.4)
表2 不同病理状态组接受新辅助化疗的女性乳腺癌患者临床和影像学资料比较
临床超声特征 训练集 验证集
非pCR组 pCR组 统计值 P 非pCR组 pCR组 统计值 P
年龄(岁,
±s
48.6±11.4 48.3±10.6 t=0.230 0.818 48.1±10.9 51.1±8.9 t=-1.355 0.179
绝经状态[例(%)] χ2=2.207 0.137 χ2=5.012 0.025
105(64.0) 37(53.6) 47(70.1) 15(46.9)
59(36.0) 32(46.4) 20(29.9) 17(53.1)
体质量[kg,MQ1Q3)] 58.0(52.0,65.0) 56.0(52.0,63.0) W=6044.500 0.411 56.0(50.5,62.2) 58.1(54.9,62.6) W=883.500 0.159
身高[m,MQ1Q3)] 1.6±0.1 1.6±0.0 t=0.260 0.795 1.6±0.1 1.6±0.0 t=0.070 0.944
BMI[kg/m2MQ1Q3)] 23.8(21.5,26.2) 22.8(21.2,25.3) W=6170.500 0.276 23.2(20.9,25.3) 23.7(22.3,27.0) W=903.000 0.207
T分期[例(%)] χ2=3.336 0.343 χ2=6.549 0.082
Ⅰ期 4(2.4) 4(5.8) 3(4.5) 3(9.4)
Ⅱ期 122(74.4) 52(75.4) 51(76.1) 17(53.1)
Ⅲ期 19(11.6) 9(13.0) 6(9.0) 8(25.0)
Ⅳ期 19(11.6) 4(5.8) 7(10.4) 4(12.5)
N分期[例(%)] χ2=1.272 0.736 χ2=0.537 0.921
0期 47(28.7) 19(27.5) 17(25.4) 7(21.9)
Ⅰ期 84(51.2) 40(58.0) 32(47.8) 17(53.1)
Ⅱ期 20(12.2) 6(8.7) 11(16.4) 4(12.5)
Ⅲ期 13(7.9) 4(5.8) 7(10.4) 4(12.5)
组织学分级[例(%)] χ2=1.945 0.378 χ2=2.331 0.354
Ⅰ级 8(4.9) 4(5.8) 7(10.4) 3(9.4)
Ⅱ级 132(80.5) 50(72.5) 53(79.1) 22(68.8)
Ⅲ级 24(14.6) 15(21.7) 7(10.4) 7(21.9)
ER[例(%)] χ2=45.945 <0.001 χ2=11.174 <0.001
阴性 27(16.5) 42(60.9) 15(22.4) 18(56.2)
阳性 137(83.5) 27(39.1) 52(77.6) 14(43.8)
PR[例(%)] χ2=38.413 <0.001 χ2=6.287 0.012
阴性 41(25.0) 47(68.1) 22(32.8) 19(59.4)
阳性 123(75.0) 22(31.9) 45(67.2) 13(40.6)
Her-2[例(%)] χ2=49.762 <0.001 χ2=20.508 <0.001
- 27(16.5) 11(15.9) 5(7.5) 3(9.4)
1+ 33(20.1) 2(2.9) 14(20.9) 3(9.4)
2+ 73(44.5) 12(17.4) 30(44.8) 3(9.4)
3+ 31(18.9) 44(63.8) 18(26.9) 23(71.9)
Ki-67[%,MQ1Q3)] 0.4(0.2,0.6) 0.5(0.3,0.7) W=4445.500 0.009 0.3(0.2,0.6) 0.5(0.4,0.7) W=779.500 0.028
分子分型[例(%)] χ2=49.615 <0.001 χ2=18.352 <0.001
LuminalA型 10(6.1) 9(13.0) 7(10.4) 3(9.4)
LuminalB型 43(26.2) 48(69.6) 21(31.3) 24(75.0)
Her-2过表达型 15(9.1) 1(1.4) 6(9.0) 0(0.0)
三阴性 96(58.5) 11(15.9) 33(49.3) 5(15.6)
图2 验证集女性乳腺癌患者新辅助化疗前(图a)及2周期新辅助化疗后(图b)各ROI最佳影像组学模型预测病理完全缓解的受试者操作特征曲线 注:RS1为新辅助化疗前影像组学模型,RS2为2周期新辅助化疗后影像组学模型,ROI为感兴趣区域。ROIin、ROI1 mm、ROI2 mm、ROI3 mm分别为瘤内区域、瘤周1 mm区域、瘤周2 mm区域、瘤周3 mm区域,AUC为曲线下面积;CI为置信区间;LR、SVM、RF、Light GBM、XGBoost为不同机器学习方法
图3 验证集女性乳腺癌患者新辅助化疗前(图a)及2周期新辅助化疗后(图b)不同模型预测病理完全缓解的受试者操作特征曲线 注:RS1为新辅助化疗前影像组学模型,RS2为2周期新辅助化疗后影像组学模型,AUC为曲线下面积;CI为置信区间;XGBoost、SVM为不同机器学习方法
表3 在女性乳腺癌患者验证集中不同模型预测病理状态结局的效能比较
图4 验证集女性乳腺癌患者新辅助化疗前(图a、c)及2周期新辅助化疗后(图b、d)临床模型、最佳影像组学模型和联合模型的校准曲线(图a、b)、临床决策分析曲线(图c、d)
图5 联合临床因子与影像组学评分预测女性乳腺癌患者新辅助化疗后病理完全缓解的列线图模型 注:PR为孕激素受体;Her-2为人表皮生长因子受体2;ER为雌激素受体
1
Siegel RL, Kratzer TB, Giaquinto AN, et al. Cancer statistics, 2025 [J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2025, 75(1): 10-45.
2
Bray F, Laversanne M, Sung H, et al. Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries [J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2024, 74(3): 229-263.
3
Wilkinson L, Gathani T. Understanding breast cancer as a global health concern [J]. Br J Radiol, 2022, 95(1130): 20211033.
4
张弛, 许国辉. 基于DCE-MRI评价乳腺癌新辅助化疗疗效的研究进展 [J]. 肿瘤预防与治疗, 2023, 36(7): 595-600.
5
Liang X, Yu X, Gao T. Machine learning with magnetic resonance imaging for prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. Eur J Radiol, 2022, 150: 110247.
6
檀双秀, 覃心妍, 孔文韬, 等. 瘤内及瘤周超声影像组学联合常规超声参数预测三阴性乳腺癌新辅助治疗病理完全缓解的价值 [J]. 中华超声影像学杂志, 2025, 34(4): 295-302.
7
Mao N, Shi Y, Lian C, et al. Intratumoral and peritumoral radiomics for preoperative prediction of neoadjuvant chemotherapy effect in breast cancer based on contrast-enhanced spectral mammography [J]. Eur Radiol, 2022, 32(5): 3207-3219.
8
江庆, 郭建锋. 超声影像组学在乳腺癌中的研究进展 [J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2020, 17(11): 1145-1148.

URL    
9
张茜, 陈佳慧, 高雪萌, 等. 基于高帧频超声造影的影像组学特征鉴别诊断甲状腺结节良恶性的价值 [J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(9): 895-903.
10
Liang X, Chen X, Yang Z, et al. Early prediction of pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy combining DCE-MRI and apparent diffusion coefficient values in breast Cancer [J]. BMC Cancer, 2022, 22(1): 1250.
11
Zhang N, Song Q, Liang H, et al. Early prediction of pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy of breast tumors: a comparative study using amide proton transfer-weighted, diffusion weighted and dynamic contrast enhanced MRI [J]. Front Med (Lausanne), 2024, 11: 1295478.
12
Li C, Ma RZ, Han GY, et al. A potential predictive biomarker for Miller/Payne grading: PD-L1 expression before neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer [J]. Oncol Res Treat, 2020, 43(11): 573-583.
13
Yushkevich PA, Piven J, Hazlett HC, et al. User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability [J]. Neuroimage, 2006, 31(3): 1116-1128.
14
Van Griethuysen JJM, Fedorov A, Parmar C, et al. Computational radiomics system to decode the radiographic phenotype [J]. Cancer Res, 2017, 77(21): e104-e107.
15
Zhou Z, Adrada BE, Candelaria RP, et al. Prediction of pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant systemic therapy in triple negative breast cancer using deep learning on multiparametric MRI [J]. Sci Rep, 2023, 13(1): 1171.
16
洪玮, 叶细容, 刘枝红, 等. 超声影像组学联合临床病理特征预测乳腺癌新辅助化疗完全病理缓解的价值 [J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(6): 571-579.
17
Bischoff H, Espié M, Petit T. Neoadjuvant therapy: current landscape and future horizons for ER-positive/HER2-negative and triple-negative early breast cancer [J]. Curr Treat Options Oncol, 2024, 25(9): 1210-1224.
18
Elias AD, Staley AW, Fornier M, et al. Clinical and immune responses to neoadjuvant fulvestrant with or without enzalutamide in ER+/Her2- breast cancer [J]. NPJ Breast Cancer, 2024, 10(1): 88.
19
Zuo W, Wang Z, Qian J, et al. QL1209 (pertuzumab biosimilar) versus reference pertuzumab plus trastuzumab and docetaxel in neoadjuvant treatment for HER2-positive, ER/PR-negative, early or locally advanced breast cancer: a multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, parallel-controlled, phase III equivalence trial [J]. Br J Cancer, 2024, 131(4): 668-675.
20
Akdag G, Yildirim S, Dogan A, et al. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Pathologic Complete Response in HR+/HER2- Breast Cancer: Impact of Tumor Ki67 and ER Status [J]. Chemotherapy, 2024, 69(3): 141-149.
21
Huang M, Jin Y, Wang M, et al. Improved prognosis in HER2-low breast cancer patients with reduced Ki67 index after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a multi-center retrospective study [J]. Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press), 2024, 16: 667-678.
22
Gradishar WJ, Moran MS, Abraham J, et al. Breast Cancer, Version 3.2024, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology [J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2024, 22(5): 331-357.
23
Ai D, Arrey EN, Postlewait LM, et al. The prevalence and clinical significance of residual occult breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: reassessing surgical pathology in cases initially described as pathological complete response [J]. Histopathology, 2025, 86(7): 1112-1120.
24
Azam R, Lim D, Curpen B, et al. Correlation of mammographic microcalcifications with final surgical pathology after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer [J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2023, 30(7): 4123-4131.
25
Bean GR, Calhoun BC. Current concepts and controversies in post-neoadjuvant breast pathology [J]. Hum Pathol, 2025, 162: 105825.
26
Cabioglu N, Karanlik H, Igci A, et al. ASO author reflections: nodal recurrence is rare in patients with cN+/ycN0 breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy regardless of the extent of axillary surgery or nodal pathology in the NEOSENTITURK-trials MF18-02/18-03 provided regional nodal irradiation is administered [J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2025, 32(2): 971-972.
27
Han M, Salamat A, Zhu L, et al. Erratum to metaplastic breast carcinoma: a clinical-pathologic study of 97 cases with subset analysis of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy [Modern Pathology 32(6) (2019) 807-816] [J]. Mod Pathol, 2023, 36(8): 100267.
28
Provenzano E, Shaaban AM. Pathology of neoadjuvant therapy and immunotherapy testing for breast cancer [J]. Histopathology, 2023, 82(1): 170-188.
29
聂全禹, 李明星, 刘莹, 等. 基于超声的瘤内联合瘤周影像组学模型对乳腺癌HER2表达状态的预测价值 [J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(12): 1103-1110.
30
Jiang T, Song J, Wang X, et al. Intratumoral and peritumoral analysis of mammography, tomosynthesis, and multiparametric MRI for predicting Ki-67 level in breast cancer: a radiomics-based study [J]. Mol Imaging Biol, 2022, 24(4): 550-559.
31
Li C, Yin J. Radiomics nomogram based on radiomics score from multiregional diffusion-weighted MRI and clinical factors for evaluating HER-2 2+ status of breast cancer [J]. Diagnostics (Basel), 2021, 11(8): 1491.
32
Qi TH, Hian OH, Kumaran AM, et al. Multi-center evaluation of artificial intelligent imaging and clinical models for predicting neoadjuvant chemotherapy response in breast cancer [J]. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2022, 193(1): 121-138.
33
Zhang S, Shao H, Li W, et al. Intra- and peritumoral radiomics for predicting malignant BiRADS category 4 breast lesions on contrast-enhanced spectral mammography: a multicenter study [J]. Eur Radiol, 2023, 33(8): 5411-5422.
34
Rajan KK, Boersma C, Beek MA, et al. Optimizing surgical strategy in locally advanced breast cancer: a comparative analysis between preoperative MRI and postoperative pathology after neoadjuvant chemotherapy [J]. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2024, 203(3): 477-486.
35
Shi W, He J, Li X, et al. Development and validation of a combined ultrasound-pathology model to predict axillary status after neoadjuvant systemic therapy in breast cancer [J]. Int J Med Sci, 2024, 21(14): 2714-2724.
[1] 邬明嫄, 李婷婷, 鲜欣欣, 罗朝阳, 杨青, 卢漫. 基于超微血流成像血管指数的列线图模型诊断肢端黑色素瘤引流区域淋巴结的价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2026, 23(04): 276-282.
[2] 张玲玲, 肖沁妤, 方晓政, 周利杰. 超声特征联合Ki-67预测乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结转移的价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2026, 23(04): 292-299.
[3] 程妹, 金亚彬, 马丁瑞, 程昊, 詹玉莲, 周丹. 基于深度学习的MRI图像分析在乳腺癌诊疗中的应用[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 169-173.
[4] 李琳, 庞乐, 潘霞, 朱磊, 王桂子, 刘梅. 汉中社区老年人口腔衰弱与躯体衰弱的横断面关联分析及风险评估模型构建[J/OL]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 217-224.
[5] 曹喆, 翁桂湖, 刘涛, 张锰钢, 杨刚, 陈浩, 邱江东, 徐建威, 张太平. 新型预后营养炎症评分系统建立以有效预测胰腺癌根治术后患者的长期预后[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2026, 20(02): 85-90.
[6] 田爱洁, 何晨熙, 孔凡庭. 乳腺癌新辅助化疗后乳腺钼靶微钙化术前评估的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 284-288.
[7] 徐宏博, 胡玉良, 魏雪栋, 金李晨, 武克风, 陈逸伦, 陆兵, 周守军, 侯建全. 基于临床和CT影像组学特征的机器学习模型对经皮肾镜术后脓毒症的预测价值[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 297-306.
[8] 陈志坚, 俞建达, 林泽润, 林宏焕, 易长昱, 池小斌, 吕立志, 陈永标. 基于术前影像肿瘤负荷评分的模型对单发肝细胞癌微血管侵犯的预测价值[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2026, 15(03): 379-385.
[9] 邓玉飞, 王志鑫, 娄珂, 张林轩, 马桂春, 港措. 影像组学在肝癌精准诊断、疗效评估及治疗方案决策优化中应用[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2026, 15(02): 172-180.
[10] 邢颖, 王峰. 基于机器学习构建肝切除术后肝衰竭预测列线图模型及其预测价值[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2026, 15(02): 190-196.
[11] 韩一梅, 冯仕川, 陈志娟. 高脂血症性急性胰腺炎复发的危险因素及其列线图预测模型构建[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(03): 222-228.
[12] 陈小坤, 杜顺达. 影像组学在肝细胞癌中的应用进展及挑战[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(02): 97-100.
[13] 孙娟华, 白引苗, 孔胜男, 王梦雪, 王文慧, 张红梅. 胰腺癌患者化疗相关性恶心呕吐风险列线图构建及验证[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(02): 114-119.
[14] 张维娜, 潘亚娟, 徐敏. 晚期消化系统癌症手术患者器官/腔隙感染的风险预测模型的建立[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(02): 120-124.
[15] 阿旺晋美, 格桑罗布, 雷彦明, 次旦旺久. 高海拔地区肝癌栓塞化疗联合靶免短期疗效预测模型构建与验证[J/OL]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2026, 14(02): 164-170.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?