Back

Real-world EHR-derived progression-free survival across successive lines of therapy informs metastatic breast cancer risk stratification

Zhao, X.; Niederhauser, T.; Balazs, Z.; Wicki, A.; Fan, B.; Krauthammer, M.

2026-03-02 health informatics
10.64898/2026.02.24.26346242 medRxiv
Show abstract

Guideline-based recommendations for metastatic lines of therapy (mLoTs), especially second lines and beyond, are comparatively sparse due to challenges in later-line treatment efficacy quantification. Scalable real-world evidence that captures the interaction between treatment and disease progression is therefore especially valuable, as regimens become increasingly individualized, confounding intensifies, and progression is rarely recorded as a structured EHR endpoint. We present a framework to (i) reconstruct clinically coherent mLoTs from longitudinal EHR using radiology-anchored progression evidence and (ii) generate individualized progression-free survival (PFS) estimates from a line-start multimodal snapshot in a highly heterogeneous cohort. In 2,881 patients contributing 8,791 metastatic mLoTs, the selected model shows strong discrimination over a 2-year horizon (Antolinis C = 0.680 {+/-} 0.006; cumulative/dynamic AUC at 1 year = 0.824 {+/-} 0.006). Predicted risk strata closely track Kaplan-Meier trends across line number and tumor subtypes, enabling calibrated risk stratification even in smaller sub-cohorts. Model prediction primarily relies on clinically plausible signals of recent metastatic burden and tumor markers, with limited dependence on surveillance cadence or subtype labels, and is robust to missingness. Together, this framework supports scalable evidence generation and interpretable, calibrated prognostication to inform risk assessment and care planning in heterogeneous metastatic practice.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
npj Digital Medicine
118 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
18.5%
2
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.9%
3
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.7%
4
European Journal of Cancer
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
5
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 28%
5.2%
6
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 37%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
7
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
71 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.2%
8
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
43 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.2%
9
eBioMedicine
183 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.6%
10
Nature Medicine
125 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
11
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 47%
2.1%
12
npj Precision Oncology
53 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.9%
13
Nature Cancer
39 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.9%
14
Cancer Research
130 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
15
Cell Reports Medicine
153 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
16
Cancer Medicine
26 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.5%
17
JAMA Network Open
130 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
18
Journal of Medical Internet Research
87 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
19
Clinical and Translational Science
22 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
20
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
21
npj Breast Cancer
23 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
22
Clinical Cancer Research
64 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
23
Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer
75 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
24
Cancers
213 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
25
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 30%
0.8%
26
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.8%
27
Annals of Internal Medicine
28 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
28
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
31 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
29
BMC Medical Research Methodology
47 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
30
Nature Genetics
286 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%