ArticleCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society2025
Hierarchical diagnosis of breast phyllodes tumors enabled by deep learning of ultrasound images: a retrospective multi-center study.
Article in Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society, 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.
- Application of Artificial Intelligence in Breast Ultrasound Diagnosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Case Report: Recurrent malignant phyllodes tumor with malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor-like differentiation and loss of H3K27me3/RB1 expression.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivePhyllodes tumors (PTs) are rare breast tumors with high recurrence rates, current methods relying on post-resection pathology often delay detection and require further surgery. We propose a deep-learning-based Phyllodes Tumors Hierarchical Diagnosis Model (PTs-HDM) for preoperative identification and grading.
methodsUltrasound images from five hospitals were retrospectively collected, with all patients having undergone surgical pathological confirmation of either PTs or fibroadenomas (FAs). PTs-HDM follows a two-stage classification: first distinguishing PTs from FAs, then grading PTs into benign or borderline/malignant. Model performance metrics including AUC and accuracy were quantitatively evaluated. A comparative analysis was conducted between the algorithm's diagnostic capabilities and those of radiologists with varying clinical experience within an external validation cohort. Through the provision of PTs-HDM's automated classification outputs and associated thermal activation mapping guidance, we systematically assessed the enhancement in radiologists' diagnostic concordance and classification accuracy.
resultsA total of 712 patients were included. On the external test set, PTs-HDM achieved an AUC of 0.883, accuracy of 87.3% for PT vs. FA classification. Subgroup analysis showed high accuracy for tumors < 2 cm (90.9%). In hierarchical classification, the model obtained an AUC of 0.856 and accuracy of 80.9%. Radiologists' performance improved with PTs-HDM assistance, with binary classification accuracy increasing from 82.7%, 67.7%, and 64.2-87.6%, 76.6%, and 82.1% for senior, attending, and resident radiologists, respectively. Their hierarchical classification AUCs improved from 0.566 to 0.827 to 0.725-0.837. PTs-HDM also enhanced inter-radiologist consistency, increasing Kappa values from - 0.05 to 0.41 to 0.12 to 0.65, and the intraclass correlation coefficient from 0.19 to 0.45.
conclusionPTs-HDM shows strong diagnostic performance, especially for small lesions, and improves radiologists' accuracy across all experience levels, bridging diagnostic gaps and providing reliable support for PTs' hierarchical diagnosis.
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.