Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40889784›Full record

ArticleBone & joint research2025

Development and evaluation of deep learning models for detecting and classifying various bone tumours in full-field limb radiographs using automated object detection models.

Masashi Yamana, Ryoma Bise, Makoto Endo, Tomoya Matsunobu, Nokitaka Setsu, Nobuhiko Yokoyama, Yasuharu Nakashima, Seiichi Uchida

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bone & joint research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Masashi YamanaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Ryoma BiseDepartment of Advanced Information Technology, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Makoto EndoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Tomoya MatsunobuDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kyushu Rosai Hospital, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Nokitaka SetsuDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, National Hospital Organization Kyushu Cancer Center, Fukuoka, Japan.
Nobuhiko YokoyamaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Yasuharu NakashimaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Seiichi UchidaDepartment of Advanced Information Technology, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.

Funding

Kyushu University
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aims: We aim to develop a fully automated deep-learning model to detect and classify benign/malignant bone tumours in full-field limb radiographs using an object detection model. The secondary aim is to identify differences in classification characteristics between the developed automated model, three orthopaedic oncologists, and three general orthopaedic surgeons. Methods: This retrospective analysis included 642 limb bone tumours with 40 diagnoses confirmed pathologically from three institutions (378 benign, 264 malignant including intermediate types). We employed end-to-end object Detection with transformers with Improved deNoising anchOr boxes (DINO) and You Only Look Once (YOLO) models. We performed five-fold cross validation on the collected radiographs, using the training data to train the models, validation data to optimize the models' parameters, and independent test data for final performance evaluation. Firstly, we confirmed DINO achieves a higher detection rate than YOLO. Secondly, we compared the classification performance of DINO with those of doctors, using various metrics such as accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, and F-measure. Results: The DINO model achieved a higher mean tumour detection rate (85.7% (95% CI 81.5 to 89.8)) than the YOLO model (80.1% (95% CI 77.2 to 82.9)). For the evaluation of classification performance, we used 113 cases that DINO detected out of 128 randomly selected cases as the evaluation test set. The accuracy and sensitivity of the DINO model, as a superior model, were significantly higher than those of general orthopaedic surgeons. The DINO model correctly classified 78.6% (22 out of 28 cases) of the challenging cases that two or more doctors misclassified. However, DINO's diagnostic errors primarily occurred with tumours that were diagnostically challenging for orthopaedic oncologists or present in unusual sites. Conclusion: The DINO model automatically detects bone tumours better than the YOLO model, and may assist doctors in detecting tumours and classifying malignant/benign bone tumours in clinical practice.

Identifiers

PMID40889784
PMCPMC12401592

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.