Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41026797›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2025

Self-contrastive weakly supervised learning framework for prognostic prediction using whole slide images.

Saul Fuster, Farbod Khoraminia, Julio Silva-Rodríguez, Umay Kiraz, Geert J L H van Leenders, Trygve Eftestøl, Valery Naranjo, Emiel A M Janssen, Tahlita C M Zuiverloon, Kjersti Engan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

10 authors.

Saul FusterDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-0285-6489
Farbod KhoraminiaDepartment of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Julio Silva-RodríguezÉTS Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Umay KirazDepartment of Pathology, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway.
Geert J L H van LeendersDepartment of Pathology and Clinical Bioinformatics, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Trygve EftestølDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway.
Valery NaranjoCVBLab, Instituto Universitario de Investigación en Tecnología Centrada en el Ser Humano (HUMAN-tech), Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain.
Emiel A M JanssenDepartment of Pathology, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7760-5396
Tahlita C M ZuiverloonDepartment of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Kjersti EnganDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We present a pioneering investigation into the application of deep learning techniques to analyze histopathological images for addressing the substantial challenge of automated prognostic prediction. Prognostic prediction poses a unique challenge as the ground truth labels are inherently weak, and the model must anticipate future events that are not directly observable in the image. To address this challenge, we propose a novel three-part framework comprising of a convolutional network based tissue segmentation algorithm for region of interest delineation, a contrastive learning module for feature extraction, and a nested multiple instance learning classification module. Our study explores the significance of various regions of interest within the histopathological slides and exploits diverse learning methods in real-world clinical scenarios. The pipeline is initially validated on artificially generated data and a simpler diagnostic task. Transitioning to prognostic prediction, tasks become more challenging. Employing bladder cancer as use case, our best models yield an AUC of 0.721 and 0.678 for recurrence and treatment outcome prediction respectively for a private data cohort. Altogether, this research serves as an initial investigation on the shortcomings of histopathological image analysis for treatment outcome prediction.

Identifiers

PMID41026797
PMCPMC12483252

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.