ArticlePloS one2026
Prostate cancer tissue mapping and stratification using DRAQ5 and Eosin fluorescent labels integrated with AI classification and segmentation algorithms.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFluorescent microscopy using the DRAQ5 and Eosin probes has been shown in the literature to be capable of producing rapid tissue characterization through synthetic H&E-like pseudoimages, which can be potentially utilized in the clinic. This study focuses on developing deep learning models for classification and segmentation of prostate tissue labeled with DRAQ5&Eosin. The fluorophores provide highly specific features of nuclear and cytoplasmic content that allows for enhanced spatial resolution and multi-parametric analytics. The inter-dependencies of image acquisition and configuration variability on AI predictive accuracy is systematically interrogated. We are thus able to establish limits on experimental and analytical robustness in automated Gleason Grading (1-5) tissue samples of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsA labeling technique based on a far-red DNA probe DRAQ5, and Eosin allowed us to generate a two-channel fluorescent readout of prostatic tissue samples. Deep learning networks were employed to classify and segment DRAQ5 and Eosin fluorescent image regions into healthy and high/low grade cancerous tissue. A subset of images were acquired with variable microscopy configurations (focus, noise, zoom, lens) to evaluate the robustness of the proposed experimental-analytical pipeline and reproducibility of predictions.
resultsMachine Leaning classifiers of High Grade Cancer (Gleason pattern 4 or 5) vs Healthy, Low Grade Cancer (Gleason pattern 3) vs Healthy, and High Grade Cancer vs Low Grade Cancer achieved an area under the curve of 0.9314, 0.8398, and 0.7715 respectively. Pixel wide cancer segmentation attained DICE scores of 0.8436, 0.5138, and 0.705 for background, healthy, and cancerous tissue respectively. The segmentation model also displayed robustness against a broad range of induced acquisition variability.
conclusionOverall, DRAQ5 and Eosin labeling in combination with AI tools demonstrate a potential pipeline used in diagnostic clinical application when employing fluorescent imaging. Future research could expand and bring this combined fluorescent biomarker and AI methodology to the clinic.
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.