ArticleEuropean radiology2026
Developing ultrasound-based machine learning models for accurate differentiation between sclerosing adenosis and invasive ductal carcinoma.
Article in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Is Surgical Excision Mandatory for Sclerosing Adenosis Diagnosed on Core Needle Biopsy? Multimodal Imaging Features and Upgrade Outcomes in a Symptomatic Cohort.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to develop a machine learning model using breast ultrasound images to improve the non-invasive differential diagnosis between Sclerosing Adenosis (SA) and Invasive Ductal Carcinoma (IDC). MATERIALS AND
methods2046 ultrasound images from 772 SA and IDC patients were collected, Regions of Interest (ROI) were delineated, and features were extracted. The dataset was split into training and test cohorts, and feature selection was performed by correlation coefficients and Recursive Feature Elimination. 10 classifiers with Grid Search and 5-fold cross-validation were applied during model training. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve and Youden index were used to model evaluation. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) was employed for model interpretation. Another 224 ROIs of 84 patients from other hospitals were used for external validation.
resultsFor the ROI-level model, XGBoost with 18 features achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.9758 (0.9654-0.9847) in the test cohort and 0.9906 (0.9805-0.9973) in the validation cohort. For the patient-level model, logistic regression with 9 features achieved an AUC of 0.9653 (0.9402-0.9859) in the test cohort and 0.9846 (0.9615-0.9978) in the validation cohort. The feature "Original shape Major Axis Length" was identified as the most important, with its value positively correlated with a higher likelihood of the sample being IDC. Feature contributions for specific ROIs were visualized as well.
conclusionWe developed explainable, ultrasound-based machine learning models with high performance for differentiating SA and IDC, offering a potential non-invasive tool for improved differential diagnosis. KEY POINTS: Question Accurately distinguishing between sclerosing adenosis (SA) and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) in a non-invasive manner has been a diagnostic challenge. Findings Explainable, ultrasound-based machine learning models with high performance were developed for differentiating SA and IDC, and validated well in external validation cohort. Critical relevance These models provide non-invasive tools to reduce misdiagnoses of SA and improve early detection for IDC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40581674What 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.