ArticlePloS one2025
Explainable AI to unveil cellular autophagy dynamics.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
- Advancements in artificial intelligence for cancer diagnosis and prognosis prediction: current applications and emerging opportunities.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Autophagy is a fundamental intracellular renovation process vital for maintaining cellular homeostasis through the degradation and recycling of damaged components. It is implicated in numerous pathological conditions, including cancer and neurodegenerative diseases. However, its dynamic nature and complexity pose challenges for manual analysis. In this study, we present a computational pipeline that leverages advanced deep learning models to automate the analysis of autophagic processes in 6,240 fluorescence microscopy images from the CELLULAR dataset. Our framework integrates object detection, cell segmentation, classification by autophagic state, cellular tracking, and explainability methods for interpretability. We achieved optimal results using YOLOv8 for object detection with a mAP50 of 0.80, U-Net++ for segmentation with an IoU of 0.82, and a vision transformer for classification with an accuracy of 0.86. To track cells, we developed a custom algorithm capable of handling complex scenarios such as cell division and morphological changes, all without requiring annotated tracking data. To enhance transparency, we employed explainability techniques based on class activation mappings to analyze model decision-making processes and validate classification outcomes, complemented by t-SNE visualizations for deeper insights into the data. Collaboration with biology experts validated our findings, highlighting the pipeline's potential to advance autophagy research. This study demonstrates the potential of deep learning and explainable AI to streamline biomedical research, reduce manual effort, and uncover key autophagy dynamics.
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.