ArticleScientific reports2025
Automatic classification of uveal melanoma response patterns following ruthenium-106 plaque brachytherapy using ultrasound images and deep convolutional neural network.
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 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Following uveal melanoma (UM) affected treatment using ruthenium-106 brachytherapy, tumor thickness patterns fall into one of four categories: decrease (regression), increase (recurrence), stop (stable), or other, which are assessed in follow-up A-mode and B-mode images. These patterns are critical indicators of the tumor's response to therapy. This study aims to apply deep learning (DL) models for predicting post-brachytherapy tumor response patterns. A cohort of 192 patients participated in this study. B-Mode images taken at the time of diagnosis were collected, and the ophthalmologists labeled the images into four response patterns based on the results of the treatment. DenseNet121 and ResNet34 models were trained and evaluated using performance metrics. DenseNet121 achieved a macro-average AUC of 0.933 (0.95% CI [0.905-0.957]), compared to 0.916 (95%CI [0.884-0.945]) for the ResNet34. The per-class evaluation showed that DenseNet121 excelled in predicting all categories, providing superior predictive accuracy. This difference in classification performance was statistically significant based on the DeLong test (p < 0.05). The ablation study revealed that the best performance was achieved without pretrained weights, using dropout layers and a batch size of 32. Both models demonstrated strong classification capabilities, with DenseNet121 providing the highest overall accuracy. This study highlights the potential of DL models in predicting response patterns in UM patients undergoing brachytherapy. Further validation and exploration of their integration into clinical practice are warranted.
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.