ArticleScientific reports2025
VISGAB: Virtual staining-driven GAN benchmarking for optimizing skin tissue histology.
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.
- ST2HE: enhancing spatial transcriptomics interpretability via virtual staining for histological annotation.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining is time-consuming, costly, hazardous, and prone to technician-dependent quality variations. This calls for fast, low-cost, and standardized computational alternatives. Lately, generative adversarial networks (GANs) have shown promising results by generating virtual stains from unstained tissue sections. However, no prior study has systematically benchmarked GANs for optimizing skin histology. Moreover, prior evaluations have focused mostly on the perceptual quality of virtual stains rather than their diagnostic utility. In this paper, we introduce VISGAB, a virtual staining-driven GAN benchmark. To our knowledge, it is the first to systematically evaluate and compare common GAN architectures for skin histology. We have also introduced a novel histology-specific fidelity index (HSFI), which focuses on diagnostic accuracy. VISGAB has been systematically applied to Cycle Consistent GAN (CycleGAN), Contrastive Unpaired Translation GAN (CUTGAN), and Dual Contrastive Learning GAN (DCLGAN) using the E-Staining DermaRepo skin histology dataset. The dataset contains 87 whole-slide images (WSIs) of normal, carcinoma, and inflammatory dermatoses tissues. VISGAB findings identify CycleGAN with superior structural fidelity (SSIM: 0.93, HSFI: 0.81), diagnostic sufficiency (75% nuclear atypia detection), and Turing test success (81%), despite higher mean inference time (~ 1.96 min) and mode collapse risk (~ 25%). Although CUTGAN and DCLGAN offer faster training, artifacts (blurring, overstaining, hallucinations) limit their diagnostic utility. Qualitative evaluations by experts and statistical rigor further substantiate our findings in favor of CycleGAN. This work supports AI-driven histopathology by addressing critical gaps in the literature.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.