ArticleAcademic radiology2025
Combination of Deep Learning Grad-CAM and Radiomics for Automatic Localization and Diagnosis of Architectural Distortion on DBT.
Article in Academic radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Mastering CT-based radiomic research in lung cancer: a practical guide from study design to critical appraisal.The British journal of radiology · 2025Guideline
- Chinese expert concern and consensus on applications of artificial intelligence in clinical cancer imaging.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Deep Learning and Attention Mechanism-based Prediction of Vaginal Invasion in Early-Stage Cervical CancerCurrent medical imaging · 2026Article
- Ultrasound-based deep learning radiomics for the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant subpleural pulmonary lesions.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Innovative AI model for bladder cancer diagnosis.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Cerebrovascular diagnosis using CTA-based intracranial aneurysm classification via transfer learning and Grad-CAM visualization.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
RATIONALE AND
objectivesDetection and diagnosis of architectural distortion (AD) on digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is challenging. This study applied artificial intelligence (AI) using deep learning (DL) algorithms to detect AD, followed by radiomics for classification. MATERIALS AND
methods500 cases with AD on DBT reports were identified; the earlier 292 cases for training, and the later 208 cases for testing. The DL Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM) was applied to automatically localize abnormalities and generate a region of interest (ROI), which was put into the radiomics model to estimate the malignancy probability for constructing ROC curves. Radiologists delineated ROI manually for comparison. Cases were categorized into pure AD and AD associated with other features, including mass, regional high-density, and calcifications. The ROC curves were compared using the DeLong test.
resultsThe overall malignancy rate was 57% (285/500). Of them, 267 cases were classified as pure AD, and the malignancy rate (106/267 = 39.7%) was significantly lower compared to AD cases associated with other features (179/233 = 76.8%, p < 0.01). In the testing set, the diagnostic AUC was 0.82 when using the manual ROI and 0.84 when using the DL-generated ROI. In the more challenging pure AD cases, DL-generated ROI yielded an AUC of 0.77, significantly lower than 0.86 for AD associated with other features.
conclusionDL could detect AD on DBT, and the diagnostic performance was comparable to manual ROI. The strategy worked for pure AD, but the performance was worse than that for AD with other features.
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.