ArticleJNCI cancer spectrum2025
Deep learning analysis of hematoxylin and eosin-stained benign breast biopsies to predict future invasive breast cancer.
Article in JNCI cancer spectrum, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBenign breast disease is an important risk factor for breast cancer development. In this study, we analyzed hematoxylin and eosin-stained whole-slide images from diagnostic benign breast disease biopsies using different deep learning approaches to predict which individuals would subsequently developed breast cancer (cases) or would not (controls).
methodsWe randomly divided cases and controls from a nested case-control study of 946 women with benign breast disease into training (331 cases, 331 control individuals) and test (142 cases, 142 control individuals) groups. We employed customized VGG-16 and AutoML machine learning models for image-only classification using whole-slide images, logistic regression for classification using only clinicopathological characteristics, and a multimodal network combining whole-slide images and clinicopathological characteristics for classification.
resultsBoth image-only (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC] = 0.83 [SE = 0.001] and 0.78 [SE = 0.001] for customized VGG-16 and AutoML models, respectively) and multimodal (AUROC = 0.89 [SE = 0.03]) networks had high discriminatory accuracy for breast cancer. The clinicopathological-characteristics-only model had the lowest AUROC (0.54 [SE = 0.03]). In addition, compared with the customized VGG-16 model, which performed better than the AutoML model, the multimodal network had improved accuracy (AUROC = 0.89 [SE = 0.03] vs 0.83 [SE = 0.02]), sensitivity (AUROC = 0.93 [SE = 0.04] vs 0.83 [SE = 0.003]), and specificity (AUROC = 0.86 [SE = 0.03] vs 0.84 [SE = 0.003]).
conclusionThis study opens promising avenues for breast cancer risk assessment in women with benign breast disease. Integrating whole-slide images and clinicopathological characteristics through a multimodal approach substantially improved predictive model performance. Future research will explore deep learning techniques to understand benign breast disease progression to invasive breast cancer.
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.