Breast cancer is the primary cause of death for women around the world, necessitating the development of highly accurate, interpreted, and technologically advanced predictive approaches to support early diagnosis and treatment. In this research, we introduce a deep learning (DL) model for predicting breast cancer using both public and private datasets. 2e model uses the internet of things (IoT) to improve data collection and real-time monitoring, and it also uses the SMOTE method to resolve issues of class imbalance. 2e proposed model combines an explainable AI approach with SHAP values to ensure model interpretability. To identify the best DL algorithm for this method, we assess and compare six different DL algorithms: temporal convolutional networks (TCNs), neural factorization machines (NFMs), long short–term memory (LSTM) networks, recurrent neural networks (RNNs), gated recurrent units (GRUs), and deep kernel learning (DKL). IoT devices allow for the continuous acquisition of patient data, which, when integrated with our predictive models, improve the capacity for early detection. Reliable cancer detection relies on our method’s enhanced predictive accuracy and sensitivity. Furthermore, we offer crucial transparency in clinical settings by using SHAP to give detailed explanations of model decisions. By employing thorough statistical analysis and cross-validation, we guarantee that our model is resilient and can be applied to various patient populations. 2e results show that our proposed IoT integrated method has the potential to improve prediction performance and boost confidence in AI-powered medical diagnostics by making them more accessible and easier to use. From a performance perspective, the proposed approach, which uses the TCN algorithm and SMOTE, achieved the best accuracy for BC prediction. With the public dataset, the experimental results were 99.44%, 100.0%, 99.01%, 98.75%, 99.37%, and 99.89% for accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, F1-score, and AUC, respectively. 2e experimental results for accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, F1-score, and AUC using the private dataset were 97.33%, 93.33%, 100%, 100%, 96.55%, and 99.48%, respectively. On the other hand, with the combined datasets, the TCN algorithm achieved 100% for all performance metrics.