ArticleBioData mining2026
Automatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma grading framework using histopathological images via artificial intelligence: a benchmarking study.
Article in BioData mining, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRenal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a common malignant tumor of the urinary system. Postoperative patients face the risk of recurrence or metastasis, and those who experience disease progression often have a poor prognosis. Therefore, investigating prognostic factors for RCC is crucial for guiding individualized patient treatment. Current studies demonstrate that RCC grading is significantly associated with prognosis, but pathological grading requires high expertise while being time-consuming.
methodsConvolutional neural networks (CNNs) have shown significant advantages in tumor tissue recognition. Based on this, our study employed different CNNs (ResNet101, DenseNet121, EfficientNetb6, Wide ResNet101 32 × 8d, ResNeXt101) to automatically distinguish non-tumor tissue from tumor tissue and determine tumor grade.
resultsThe results demonstrated that at 100× magnification (actual magnification of the pathological images, likewise for the following), in patch-level, the CNN achieved an accuracy of 0.8565 for identifying non-tumor tissues; at 400× magnification, the accuracy reached 0.8919. For tumor tissues of different grades, in patch-level, the CNNs performed best for Grade 1 tissues, with accuracies of 0.8616 at 100× magnification and 0.8182 at 400× magnification. Besides, at 100× magnification, in patch-level, the accuracy in identifying for Grade 2, Grade 3, Grade 4 tissues was 0.6225, 0.7604, and 0.8361. At 400× magnification, the accuracy was 0.6883, 0.6546 and 0.5127 for Grade 2, Grade 3 and Grade 4 tissues. Compared to pathologists, who can not distinguish between Grade 1 and Grade 2 tissues at 100× magnification, nor between Grade 2 and Grade 3 tissues at 400× magnification, the CNN can distinguish between Grade 1 and Grade 2 tissues at 100×magnification, achieving an accuracy of 0.6225 for Grade 2 tissue identification. They are also capable of differentiating Grade 2 and Grade 3 tissues at 400x magnification, with an accuracy of 0.6546 for Grade 3 tissue, which demonstrated superior performance. An integrated model constructed from patch-level predictions was used to determine the grade at the whole-slide level. The results revealed a clear tendency towards left-skewed or right-skewed distributions in the grading predictions causing by the manner constructed the integrated model emphasizing whether the highest-grade tissue is present in the tumor tissue. This approach requires further refinement.
conclusionThese findings indicate that CNNs can identify tumor and non-tumor tissue of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) and determine tumor grade, exhibiting advantages over pathologists. However, the model’s performance at the whole-slide level requires further improvement. Owing to the generalizability of this study, its findings can be considered as a potential benchmark for similar research, providing a reference for subsequent related studies.
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.