ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Multiview deep learning networks based on automated breast volume scanner images for identifying breast cancer in BI-RADS 4.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multimodal combined model integrating 2.5D deep learning and habitat radiomics for malignancy discrimination in ≤2 cm BI-RADS 4 breast lesions.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- A Multimodal Ultrasound Radiomics Study for Discriminating Benign and Malignant Breast Lesions Classified as BI-RADS Category 4.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-based automated breast ultrasound radiomics for breast tumor diagnosis and treatment: a narrative review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To develop and validate a deep learning (DL) based automatic segmentation and classification system to classify benign and malignant BI-RADS 4 lesions imaged with ABVS. Methods: From May to December 2020, patients with BI-RADS 4 lesions from Centre 1 and Centre 2 were retrospectively enrolled and divided into a training set (Centre 1) and an independent test set (Centre 2). All included patients underwent an ABVS examination within one week before the biopsy. A two-stage DL framework consisting of an automatic segmentation module and an automatic classification module was developed. The preprocessed ABVS images were input into the segmentation module for BI-RADS 4 lesion segmentation. The classification model was constructed to extract features and output the probability of malignancy. The diagnostic performances among different ABVS views (axial, sagittal, coronal, and multi-view) and DL architectures (Inception-v3, ResNet 50, and MobileNet) were compared. Results: A total of 251 BI-RADS 4 lesions from 216 patients were included (178 in the training set and 73 in the independent test set). The average Dice coefficient, precision, and recall of the segmentation module in the test set were 0.817 ± 0.142, 0.903 ± 0.183, and 0.886 ± 0.187, respectively. The DL model based on multiview ABVS images and Inception-v3 achieved the best performance, with an AUC, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 0.949 (95% CI: 0.945-0.953), 82.14%, 95.56%, 92.00%, and 89.58%, respectively, in the test set. Conclusions: The developed multiview DL model enables automatic segmentation and classification of BI-RADS 4 lesions in ABVS images.
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.