ArticleFrontiers in cell and developmental biology2026
Development and internal validation of a task-conditioned multimodal radiology-pathology model for breast cancer staging and biomarker profiling: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in cell and developmental 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To retrospectively develop and evaluate a task-conditioned multimodal artificial intelligence framework, in which a learned task embedding and modality-availability mask generate endpoint-specific weights over predefined radiology-only, pathology-only, and fusion experts, for breast cancer staging and biomarker profiling. Methods: We retrospectively assembled a cohort of 923 patients with paired radiology and pathology data. Nine tasks included TNM components [tumor extent (T), nodal involvement (N), and distant metastasis (M)], clinical stage, histological grade, and estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, HER2, and Ki-67 status. Five convolutional neural network backbones were benchmarked for each modality. Task-specific models were selected by validation AUROC, and a late-fusion transformer was used for paired data. We further evaluated learned MoE gating, task-conditioned MoE routing with task embeddings and modality-availability masks, missing-modality robustness, and paired-bootstrap AUROC comparisons. An independent external cohort assessed feasibility for mammography-based pathological complete response and pathology-based triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) prediction. Results: Best single-modality models achieved AUROCs ranging from 0.606 to 0.990 across tasks, with an AUROC of 0.990 observed for M staging and strong performance observed for histological grade (AUROC, 0.949; accuracy, 0.908) and HER2 status (AUROC, 0.810; accuracy, 0.762). Fixed late fusion improved the mean AUROC from 0.813 to 0.826. Learned MoE gating and task-conditioned MoE further improved mean AUROC to 0.830 and 0.834, respectively. Task-conditioned MoE improved mean AUROC by 0.009 over fixed late fusion (95% CI, 0.005-0.013; P = 0.011) and by 0.021 over the best single-modality expert. Under 70% random missing-modality simulation, task-conditioned MoE outperformed fixed fusion with zero imputation by 0.067 mean AUROC. In external feasibility analyses, the mammography-based pCR model achieved an AUROC of 0.758, and the pathology-based triple-negative breast cancer model achieved an AUROC of 0.872. Conclusion: OmniBreast demonstrated the feasibility of task-conditioned radiology-only, pathology-only, and fused prediction in the internal nine-task benchmark. The external analyses provided preliminary support for feasibility on two related endpoint-extension tasks but did not establish generalizability across the nine primary tasks; multicenter external validation and prospective clinical evaluation remain necessary.
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.