Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32751349›Full record

ArticleBiomolecules2020

The Development of a Skin Cancer Classification System for Pigmented Skin Lesions Using Deep Learning.

Shunichi Jinnai, Naoya Yamazaki, Yuichiro Hirano, Yohei Sugawara, Yuichiro Ohe, Ryuji Hamamoto

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomolecules, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
11.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

70 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 252 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shunichi JinnaiDepartment of Dermatologic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-3984-8493
Naoya YamazakiDepartment of Dermatologic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan.
Yuichiro HiranoPreferred Networks, 1-6-1 Otemachi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-0004, Japan.
Yohei SugawaraPreferred Networks, 1-6-1 Otemachi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-0004, Japan.
Yuichiro OheDepartment of Thoracic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-6137-073X
Ryuji HamamotoDivision of Molecular Modification and Cancer Biology, National Cancer Center Research Institute, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan.
Preferred Networks (Japan) · JPRIKEN Center for Advanced Intelligence Project · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent studies have demonstrated the usefulness of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to classify images of melanoma, with accuracies comparable to those achieved by dermatologists. However, the performance of a CNN trained with only clinical images of a pigmented skin lesion in a clinical image classification task, in competition with dermatologists, has not been reported to date. In this study, we extracted 5846 clinical images of pigmented skin lesions from 3551 patients. Pigmented skin lesions included malignant tumors (malignant melanoma and basal cell carcinoma) and benign tumors (nevus, seborrhoeic keratosis, senile lentigo, and hematoma/hemangioma). We created the test dataset by randomly selecting 666 patients out of them and picking one image per patient, and created the training dataset by giving bounding-box annotations to the rest of the images (4732 images, 2885 patients). Subsequently, we trained a faster, region-based CNN (FRCNN) with the training dataset and checked the performance of the model on the test dataset. In addition, ten board-certified dermatologists (BCDs) and ten dermatologic trainees (TRNs) took the same tests, and we compared their diagnostic accuracy with FRCNN. For six-class classification, the accuracy of FRCNN was 86.2%, and that of the BCDs and TRNs was 79.5% (

Indexed as

Deep LearningHumansMelanomaNeural Networks, ComputerSkinSkin Neoplasmsartificial intelligence (AI)deep learningmelanomaneural networkskin cancer

Identifiers

PMID32751349
PMCPMC7465007
OpenAlexW3045827876

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.