ArticleBiomedical engineering and computational biology2026
Numerical Interpretation of Variation Indices of Tumor Outline Tracking Using Artificial Intelligence Mapping.
Article in Biomedical engineering and computational biology, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate differentiation between benign and malignant breast tumors is critical for early diagnosis and treatment planning. Traditional approaches often rely on whole-image processing; however, the tumor contour contains rich morphological cues that can independently support malignancy assessment. Leveraging these contour-based features using artificial intelligence (AI) can enhance diagnostic specificity and interpretability. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic potential of tumor outline features extracted from mammographic images using deep learning models, with a focus on interpreting their variations numerically and biologically. It also investigates whether combining deep features (ensemble approach) can improve classification accuracy. Methods: A public dataset of 100 mammography tumor contours was analyzed. Eight deep learning models (ResNet50, Xception65, VGG16, AlexNet, DenseNet, GoogLeNet, Inception-v3, and a feature-level ensemble) were used for feature extraction. These features were then classified using 5 machine learning algorithms: SVM, KNN, DT, Naive Bayes, and a shallow neural network. Performance metrics included accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and precision. Results: Xception65 with Naive Bayes achieved 97.97% accuracy, while the feature ensemble with an ensemble classifier achieved 96.96% accuracy, 95.45% sensitivity, and 98.48% specificity. Naive Bayes consistently outperformed other classifiers in integrating deep contour features. Conclusion and Clinical Interpretation: Tumor contour-based analysis provides biologically meaningful indicators of malignancy-such as irregularity, spiculation, and shape complexity-without relying on full pixel intensity. The results demonstrate that outline-driven AI analysis can enhance breast cancer screening by offering a low-complexity, high-performance diagnostic tool. Future integration into clinical workflows may aid radiologists in real-time and reduce false positives in mammographic diagnosis.
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.