IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0353489.html

Stability and interpretability of penalized logistic regression models for breast cancer risk prediction

Author

Listed:
  • Francis Okyere
  • Michael Nyanney

Abstract

Penalized logistic regression is widely used in biomedical classification to address multicollinearity and improve predictive performance, yet the stability and reproducibility of selected predictors are often overlooked. This study evaluates feature stability and interpretability in ridge, lasso, and elastic-net logistic regression for breast cancer diagnosis using the Wisconsin Diagnostic Breast Cancer dataset. Models were trained with cross-validated tuning and evaluated on an independent test set using discrimination, classification, and calibration metrics. Feature stability was quantified through bootstrap selection frequencies. All penalized models achieved near-perfect discrimination and improved calibration compared with unpenalized logistic regression. However, substantial differences emerged in stability and sparsity. Ridge regression exhibited maximal stability but retained all predictors, limiting interpretability. Lasso regression produced highly sparse models but showed greater selection variability. Elastic-net regression balanced sparsity and stability, consistently retaining correlated predictors linked to tumor morphology. These findings demonstrate that stability assessment provides critical information beyond predictive accuracy and supports stability-aware penalized modeling for interpretable and reproducible biomedical risk prediction.

Suggested Citation

  • Francis Okyere & Michael Nyanney, 2026. "Stability and interpretability of penalized logistic regression models for breast cancer risk prediction," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(7), pages 1-17, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0353489
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0353489
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0353489
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0353489&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0353489?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0353489. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.