ArticleScientific reports2025
Breast cancer classification based on microcalcifications using dual branch vision transformer fusion.
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 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- ViT-FuseNet: Same-Patient MRI-Pathology Feature Fusion for Multimodal Breast Cancer Diagnosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- X-Pruning: a dual-stream information fusion mammography diagnosis network based on pruned transformer and cross-attention mechanism.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Deep learning-based breast cancer detection with customized ensemble attention.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A Novel Hybrid CNN-ViT-Based Bi-Directional Cross-Guidance Fusion-Driven Breast Cancer Detection Model.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- GRACE-ViT: Grouped Recalibration With Adaptive Contextual Emphasis for Breast Cancer Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Response Prediction.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Breast microcalcifications (MCs) are among the earliest and most challenging indicators of breast cancer, owing to their subtle morphological characteristics and the structural variability between CC and MLO mammographic projections. Current deep learning architectures frequently lose micro-level lesion details while attempting to model cross-view continuity, limiting their reliability in clinical diagnosis. This paper introduces a novel anatomy-aware Multiview transformer architecture designed to preserve microcalcification-scale texture patterns and enforce cross-view anatomical consistency. This approach enables a degree of view-coherent feature learning not previously achieved in mammography analysis. A key innovation is the development of pathology-oriented, view-congruent transformer representations that maintain the fine morphological features of MCs and preserve structural integrity across projections, directly addressing long-standing challenges in dual-view interpretation. The proposed framework was evaluated on the CBIS-DDSM dataset and demonstrated strong diagnostic performance, achieving an accuracy of 96.80, a precision of 97.10, a recall of 96.40, an F1-score of 96.70, and an AUC of 0.982. It also performed effectively in clinically challenging subgroups, obtaining the highest class-wise F1-scores for No Damage (0.9792), Matrix Cracking (0.9565), and Pleomorphic MCs (0.9608). Moreover, visual explanation techniques consistently highlighted clinically relevant calcification clusters, enhancing both interpretability and clinical reliability. These results establish a new representational paradigm for dual-view mammography. The proposed framework advances automated microcalcification assessment by integrating fine-grained lesion preservation with anatomically aligned Multiview reasoning.
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.