ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound
Deep learning segmentation architectures for automatic detection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy samples based on whole-slide imaging.
Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automated Bergmann-Kliesch Score assessment in testicular biopsies using artificial intelligence-based whole-slide image analysis: a retrospective monocentric development and validation study.Basic and clinical andrology · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Pancreatic Endoscopic Ultrasonography: From Image-Based Diagnosis to Cytopathology.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy is the procedure of choice for the diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Nevertheless, the samples obtained are small and require expertise in pathology, whereas the diagnosis is difficult in view of the scarcity of malignant cells and the important desmoplastic reaction of these tumors. With the help of artificial intelligence, the deep learning architectures produce a fast, accurate, and automated approach for PDAC image segmentation based on whole-slide imaging. Given the effectiveness of U-Net in semantic segmentation, numerous variants and improvements have emerged, specifically for whole-slide imaging segmentation. Methods: In this study, a comparison of 7 U-Net architecture variants was performed on 2 different datasets of EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy samples from 2 medical centers (31 and 33 whole-slide images, respectively) with different parameters and acquisition tools. The U-Net architecture variants evaluated included some that had not been previously explored for PDAC whole-slide image segmentation. The evaluation of their performance involved calculating accuracy through the mean Dice coefficient and mean intersection over union (IoU). Results: The highest segmentation accuracies were obtained using Inception U-Net architecture for both datasets. PDAC tissue was segmented with the overall average Dice coefficient of 97.82% and IoU of 0.87 for Dataset 1, respectively, overall average Dice coefficient of 95.70%, and IoU of 0.79 for Dataset 2. Also, we considered the external testing of the trained segmentation models by performing the cross evaluations between the 2 datasets. The Inception U-Net model trained on Train Dataset 1 performed with the overall average Dice coefficient of 93.12% and IoU of 0.74 on Test Dataset 2. The Inception U-Net model trained on Train Dataset 2 performed with the overall average Dice coefficient of 92.09% and IoU of 0.81 on Test Dataset 1. Conclusions: The findings of this study demonstrated the feasibility of utilizing artificial intelligence for assessing PDAC segmentation in whole-slide imaging, supported by promising scores.
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.