Abstract Background Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) fragmentomics represents a transformative approach for early breast cancer detection, offering significant potential to improve patient survival through timely intervention. Despite this promise, existing cfDNA-based methods demonstrate inadequate sensitivity for clinical implementation, particularly in early-stage malignancies. There remains an urgent need to develop robust, cost-effective diagnostic strategies integrating cfDNA fragmentomic profiling with advanced machine learning algorithms. Methods This research involved a total of 191 participants who did not have cancer and 204 participants diagnosed with breast cancer. The plasma cfDNA samples from the participants underwent profiling through whole-genome sequencing. A variety of cfDNA characteristics and machine learning models were assessed within the training cohort to attain the best model. The evaluation of model performance took place in a separate validation cohort. Results An assembled ensemble model that combines three cfDNA characteristics with six machine learning algorithms, developed in the training cohort (cancer: 119; healthy: 112), outperformed all models created from individual feature-algorithm pairs. This composite model demonstrated enhanced sensitivities of 93.3% at a specificity of 94.6% for the training cohort (area under the curve AUC, 0.983) and 96.5% at 93.7% specificity for the validation cohort (AUC, 0.989) (cancer: 85; healthy: 79). Additionally, our model exhibited sensitivity across various stages, distinct pathological types, and diverse molecular classifications. Conclusion We have established a stacked ensemble model using cfDNA fragmentomics features and achieved superior sensitivity for detecting early-stage breast cancer, which could promote early diagnosis and benefit more patients.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Breast Cancer Research
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
A Tue, study studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69401ef02d562116f28f9583 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13058-025-02190-8
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: