ArticleBJU international2026
Deep learning for fluorescence confocal microscopy image interpretation in radical prostatectomy.
Article in BJU international, 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
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo develop and validate a deep learning model for interpretation of fluorescence confocal microscopy (FCM) images for intraoperative surgical margin assessment during radical prostatectomy (RP). PATIENTS AND
methodsFluorescence confocal microscopy images from the multicentre Imperial Prostate 8-Fluorescence Confocal Microscopy for Rapid Evaluation of Surgical Cancer Excision (IP8-FLUORESCE) study were used to train and test a convolutional neural network model. The modified model incorporated focal loss with label smoothing, dropout regularisation, adaptive class weighting, and weighted sampling to address pronounced class imbalance. Images were pre-processed by extracting regions of interest at a defined digital zoom level and normalised to 896 × 896 pixels. The reference standard was surgical margin status on conventional histopathology assessed by an expert histopathologist. Diagnostic performance was assessed using sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC), and calibration via Brier scores. External validation was conducted using an independent dataset from the LaserSAFE feasibility trial. Model explainability was evaluated using Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM) and a custom graphical user interface (GUI) was developed to support real-time deployment.
resultsA total of 275 images (37 tumour and 238 benign from 24 patients) were included for model development and internal testing. On the internal test set (n = 57), the model achieved a sensitivity of 87.5%, specificity of 97.9%, and an AUC of 0.93, with good calibration (Brier score 0.16). External validation using 46 independent images yielded a sensitivity of 91.3%, specificity of 73.9%, and an AUC of 0.83, with acceptable calibration (Brier score 0.20). Grad-CAM visualisations aligned with malignant structures on FCM images, and the GUI enabled rapid, interpretable predictions in <2 s.
conclusionsWe developed and validated a deep learning model for interpretation of FCM images from RP specimens, which demonstrated strong discriminative performance and generalisability for automated FCM interpretation. This approach represents a scalable solution for real-time intraoperative margin assessment and may reduce reliance on intraoperative pathology support.
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.