ArticleCells2022
ChromoEnhancer: An Artificial-Intelligence-Based Tool to Enhance Neoplastic Karyograms as an Aid for Effective Analysis.
Article in Cells, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- An integrated AI pipeline for automated cytogenetic analysis of bone marrow karyograms in hematological malignancies: A Pix2Pix enhancement and deep learning detection approach.Journal of pathology informatics · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Haematologic Diagnostics: Current Applications and Future Perspectives.Acta haematologica · 2026Review
- Application of artificial intelligence in laboratory hematology: Advances, challenges, and prospects.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2025Review
- Optimization of diagnosis and treatment of hematological diseases via artificial intelligence.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Advancements in Umbilical Cord Biobanking: A Comprehensive Review of Current Trends and Future Prospects.Stem cells and cloning : advances and applications · 2024Review
- Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Diagnostic Cytology and Genomic Testing for Hematologic Disorders.Cells · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cytogenetics laboratory tests are among the most important procedures for the diagnosis of genetic diseases, especially in the area of hematological malignancies. Manual chromosomal karyotyping methods are time consuming and labor intensive and, hence, expensive. Therefore, to alleviate the process of analysis, several attempts have been made to enhance karyograms. The current chromosomal image enhancement is based on classical image processing. This approach has its limitations, one of which is that it has a mandatory application to all chromosomes, where customized application to each chromosome is ideal. Moreover, each chromosome needs a different level of enhancement, depending on whether a given area is from the chromosome itself or it is just an artifact from staining. The analysis of poor-quality karyograms, which is a difficulty faced often in preparations from cancer samples, is time consuming and might result in missing the abnormality or difficulty in reporting the exact breakpoint within the chromosome. We developed ChromoEnhancer, a novel artificial-intelligence-based method to enhance neoplastic karyogram images. The method is based on Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) with a data-centric approach. GANs are known for the conversion of one image domain to another. We used GANs to convert poor-quality karyograms into good-quality images. Our method of karyogram enhancement led to robust routine cytogenetic analysis and, therefore, to accurate detection of cryptic chromosomal abnormalities. To evaluate ChromoEnahancer, we randomly assigned a subset of the enhanced images and their corresponding original (unenhanced) images to two independent cytogeneticists to measure the karyogram quality and the elapsed time to complete the analysis, using four rating criteria, each scaled from 1 to 5. Furthermore, we compared the enhanced images with our method to the original ones, using quantitative measures (PSNR and SSIM metrics).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.