ArticleFrontiers in medical technology2026
An evaluation of pathology foundation models with weakly supervised learning for BRAF mutation prediction in melanoma whole slide images.
Article in Frontiers in medical technology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Melanoma is the most aggressive form of skin cancer, with around 40-50% of cases harbouring BRAF mutations that can be effectively targeted to improve patient outcomes. Typically, BRAF mutations are identified through DNA sequencing, which can be costly and contribute significantly to turn-around-times. Predicting BRAF status directly from haematoxylin and eosin (H&E) whole-slide images (WSIs) could offer a faster and more accessible alternative within digital pathology workflows. Methods: In this study, we evaluated six pathology foundation models for WSI-based BRAF mutation prediction using an attention-based multiple instance learning (ABMIL) framework. Training and testing models with five-fold cross-validation, using 1,109 WSIs from 745 patients and performing external validation with TCGA and VisioMel cohorts. Results: Models which utilised H-Optimus-1 features achieved the highest AUROC values on the internal test set (0.80 (0.72, 0.88)) and VisioMel (0.79 (0.75, 0.83) external test set, while UNI2-h features demonstrated superior sensitivity and higher TCGA performance (AUROC: 0.76 (0.66, 0.86)). Subgroup analyses indicated that model performance was impacted by histopathological features such as ulceration and tissue area, while t-SNE plots showed that high-attention foundation model features tended to cluster based on the dataset the features were from, rather than biological signal. Discussion: Overall, foundation models combined with weakly supervised learning provide competitive performance for BRAF status prediction in melanoma WSIs, but our findings highlight the need for diverse melanoma datasets and the importance of evaluating model performance beyond a single metric when developing H&E-based computational biomarkers.
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.