ArticleScientific reports2025
End-to-end CNN-based deep learning enhances breast lesion characterization using quantitative ultrasound (QUS) spectral parametric images.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
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
QUS spectral parametric imaging offers a fast and accurate method for breast lesion characterization. This study explored using deep CNNs to classify breast lesions from QUS spectral parametric images, aiming to enhance radiomics and conventional machine learning. Predictive models were developed using transfer learning with pre-trained CNNs to distinguish malignant from benign lesions. The dataset included 276 participants: 184 malignant (median age, 51 years [IQR: 27-81 years]) and 92 benign cases (median age, 46 years [IQR: 18-75 years]). QUS spectral parametric imaging was applied to the US RF data and resulted in 1764 images of QUS spectral (MBF, SS, and SI), along with QUS scattering parameters (ASD and AAC). The data were randomly split into 60% training, 20% validation, and 20% test sets, stratified by lesion subtype, and repeated five times. The number of convolutional blocks was optimized, and the final convolutional layer was fine-tuned. Models tested included ResNet, Inception-v3, Xception, and EfficientNet. Xception-41 achieved a recall of 86 ± 3%, specificity of 87 ± 5%, balanced accuracy of 87 ± 3%, and an AUC of 0.93 ± 0.02 on test sets. EfficientNetV2-M showed similar performance with a recall of 91 ± 1%, specificity of 81 ± 7%, balanced accuracy of 86 ± 3%, and an AUC of 0.92 ± 0.02. CNN models outperformed radiomics and conventional machine learning (p-values < 0.05). This study demonstrated the capability of end-to-end CNN-based models for the accurate characterization of breast masses from QUS spectral parametric images.
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.