ArticleComputational and structural biotechnology journal2025
A new approach combining a whole-slide foundation model and gradient boosting for predicting BRAF mutation status in dermatopathology.
Article in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- An evaluation of pathology foundation models with weakly supervised learning for BRAF mutation prediction in melanoma whole slide images.Frontiers in medical technology · 2026Article
- Computational pathology in breast cancer: optimizing molecular prediction through task-oriented AI models.NPJ breast cancer · 2025Review
- The role of artificial intelligence-based foundation models and "copilots" in cancer pathology: potential and challenges.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2025Review
- From Slide to Insight: The Emerging Alliance of Digital Pathology and AI in Melanoma Diagnostics.Cancers · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Determining the mutation status of proto-oncogene B-Rapidly Accelerated Fibrosarcoma (BRAF) is crucial in melanoma for guiding targeted therapies and improving patient outcomes. While genetic testing has become more accessible, histopathological examination remains central to routine diagnostics, and an image-based strategy could further streamline the associated time and cost. In this study, we propose a new machine learning framework that integrates a large-scale, pretrained foundation model (Prov-GigaPath) with a gradient-boosting classifier (XGBoost) to predict BRAF-V600 mutation status directly from histopathological slides. Our approach was trained and cross-validated on the Skin Cutaneous Melanoma (SKCM) dataset from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA; 275 slides), where the fine-tuned Prov-GigaPath model alone achieved an average Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.653 during cross-validation. An additional test on 68 slides from the University Hospital Essen (UHE), Germany, yielded an AUC of 0.697 (95 % CI: 0.553-0.821). Incorporating XGBoost significantly improved performance, reaching an AUC of 0.824 (SD=0.043) during cross-validation and 0.772 (95 % CI: 0.650-0.886) on the independent set-representing a new state-of-the-art for image-only BRAF mutation prediction in melanoma. By employing a weakly supervised, data-efficient pipeline, this method reduces the need for extensive annotations and costly molecular assays. While these results are not intended to replace genetic testing at this stage, they mark a new milestone in predicting BRAF mutation status solely from histopathological slides-a concept not yet fully established in prior research-and underscore the potential for seamlessly integrating automated, AI-driven decision-support tools into diagnostic workflows, thereby expediting personalized therapy decisions and advancing precision oncology.
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.