Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39915630›Full record

ArticleCommunications medicine2025

Swarm learning with weak supervision enables automatic breast cancer detection in magnetic resonance imaging.

Oliver Lester Saldanha, Jiefu Zhu, Gustav Müller-Franzes, Zunamys I Carrero, Nicholas R Payne, Lorena Escudero Sánchez, Paul Christophe Varoutas, Sreenath Kyathanahally, Narmin Ghaffari Laleh, Kevin Pfeiffer and 22 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Decentralized, privacy-preserving surgical video analysis with Swarm Learning.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025
    Article
  3. Author response to ZhangJournal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

32 authors.

Oliver Lester Saldanha *Else Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Jiefu Zhu *Else Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Gustav Müller-FranzesDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Zunamys I CarreroDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8501-1566
Nicholas R PayneDepartment of Radiology, Clinical School, Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0492-971X
Lorena Escudero SánchezDepartment of Radiology, Clinical School, Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3464-9206
Paul Christophe VaroutasBreast Imaging Department, Mitera Hospital Athens, Athens, Greece.
Sreenath KyathanahallyInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Narmin Ghaffari LalehElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Kevin PfeifferElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-7643-4284
Marta LigeroElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9824-7316
Jakob BehnerElse Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Kamarul A AbdullahDepartment of Radiology, Clinical School, Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Georgios ApostolakosBreast Imaging Department, Mitera Hospital Athens, Athens, Greece.
Chrysafoula KolofousiBreast Imaging Department, Mitera Hospital Athens, Athens, Greece.
Antri KleanthousBreast Imaging Department, Mitera Hospital Athens, Athens, Greece.
Michail KalogeropoulosBreast Imaging Department, Mitera Hospital Athens, Athens, Greece.
Cristina RossiInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Sylwia NowakowskaInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Alexandra AthanasiouBreast Imaging Department, Mitera Hospital Athens, Athens, Greece.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4530-0210
Raquel Perez-LopezRadiomics Group, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Barcelona, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9176-0130
Ritse MannDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8111-1930
Wouter VeldhuisImaging Division, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9798-6843
Julia CampsBreast Cancer Unit, Ribera Salud Hospitals, Valencia, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8061-6272
Volkmar SchulzFraunhofer Institute for Digital Medicine MEVIS, Bremen, Germany.
Markus WenzelFraunhofer Institute for Digital Medicine MEVIS, Bremen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-4078-9121
Sergey MorozovThe European Society of Medical Imaging Informatics (EuSoMII), Vienna, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6545-6170
Alexander CiritsisInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Christiane KuhlDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Fiona J GilbertDepartment of Radiology, Clinical School, Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0124-9962
Daniel Truhn *Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9605-0728
Jakob Nikolas Kather *Else Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany. jakob-nikolas.kather@alumni.dkfz.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3730-5348

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver the next 5 years, new breast cancer screening guidelines recommending magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for certain patients will significantly increase the volume of imaging data to be analyzed. While this increase poses challenges for radiologists, artificial intelligence (AI) offers potential solutions to manage this workload. However, the development of AI models is often hindered by manual annotation requirements and strict data-sharing regulations between institutions.

methodsIn this study, we present an integrated pipeline combining weakly supervised learning-reducing the need for detailed annotations-with local AI model training via swarm learning (SL), which circumvents centralized data sharing. We utilized three datasets comprising 1372 female bilateral breast MRI exams from institutions in three countries: the United States (US), Switzerland, and the United Kingdom (UK) to train models. These models were then validated on two external datasets consisting of 649 bilateral breast MRI exams from Germany and Greece.

resultsUpon systematically benchmarking various weakly supervised two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) deep learning (DL) methods, we find that the 3D-ResNet-101 demonstrates superior performance. By implementing a real-world SL setup across three international centers, we observe that these collaboratively trained models outperform those trained locally. Even with a smaller dataset, we demonstrate the practical feasibility of deploying SL internationally with on-site data processing, addressing challenges such as data privacy and annotation variability.

conclusionsCombining weakly supervised learning with SL enhances inter-institutional collaboration, improving the utility of distributed datasets for medical AI training without requiring detailed annotations or centralized data sharing.

Identifiers

PMID39915630
PMCPMC11802753

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.