ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2025
Automating Prostate Cancer Grading: A Novel Deep Learning Framework for Automatic Prostate Cancer Grade Assessment using Classification and Segmentation.
Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2025. 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.
- Automatic Grade Classification in Prostate Histopathological Images Using EfficientNet and Ordinal Focal Loss.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prostate Cancer (PCa) is the second most common cancer in men and affects more than a million people each year. Grading prostate cancer is based on the Gleason grading system, a subjective and labor-intensive method for evaluating prostate tissue samples. The variability in diagnostic approaches underscores the urgent need for more reliable methods. By integrating deep learning technologies and developing automated systems, diagnostic precision can be improved, and human error minimized. The present work introduces a three-stage framework-based innovative deep-learning system for assessing PCa severity using the PANDA challenge dataset. After a meticulous selection process, 2699 usable cases were narrowed down from the initial 5160 cases after extensive data cleaning. There are three stages in the proposed framework: classification of PCa grades using deep neural networks (DNNs), segmentation of PCa grades, and computation of International Society for Urological Pathology (ISUP) grades using machine learning classifiers. Four classes of patches were classified and segmented (benign, Gleason 3, Gleason 4, and Gleason 5). Patch sampling at different sizes (500 × 500 and 1000 × 1000 pixels) was used to optimize the classification and segmentation processes. The segmentation performance of the proposed network is enhanced by a Self-organized operational neural network (Self-ONN) based DeepLabV3 architecture. Based on these predictions, the distribution percentages of each cancer grade within the whole slide images (WSI) were calculated. These features were then concatenated into machine learning classifiers to predict the final ISUP PCa grade. EfficientNet_b0 achieved the highest F1-score of 83.83% for classification, while DeepLabV3 + architecture based on self-ONN and EfficientNet encoder achieved the highest Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) score of 84.9% for segmentation. Using the RandomForest (RF) classifier, the proposed framework achieved a quadratic weighted kappa (QWK) score of 0.9215. Deep learning frameworks are being developed to grade PCa automatically and have shown promising results. In addition, it provides a prospective approach to a prognostic tool that can produce clinically significant results efficiently and reliably. Further investigations are needed to evaluate the framework's adaptability and effectiveness across various clinical scenarios.
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.