ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Development and validation of a deep learning model using MR imaging for predicting brain metastases: an accuracy-focused study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Brain metastases (BM), originating from extracranial malignancies, significantly threaten patient health. Accurate BM identification is crucial but labor-intensive manually. This study developed and validated a system for BM diagnosis, assessing its performance and stability. Methods: 470 patients diagnosed with BM were divided into an 80% training set (n=379) and a 20% internal test set (n=91) using systematic sampling. An additional 172 patients were retrospectively enrolled for external validation. A comprehensive preprocessing pipeline was implemented. We developed a 3D U-Net model with a ResNet-34 backbone for BM prediction. MRI scans were resampled to 0.833 mm³ isotropic voxels, underwent skull stripping using SynthStrip, and were intensity-normalized via Z-score normalization. The model was trained on MRI scans paired with segmentation masks, utilizing ImageNet-pretrained encoder weights and a patch-based strategy (128×128×128 voxels). Results: The model maintained perfect specificity and AUCs across gender and age groups, with no significant differences in other metrics, confirming false positive exclusion unaffected by demographics. By cancer type: Internal testing showed significant difference of AUC ( Conclusion: The model demonstrated strong robustness and perfect specificity across demographics. While showing cancer type dependency (requiring improved lung cancer sensitivity), its high efficiency (40%-50% time reduction) and generalization provide a solid foundation for clinical translation.
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.