Cited by 7Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementAI in cancer detectionAdvanced Neural Network Applications

Multimodal deep learning ensemble framework for skin cancer detection

Open access
Saeed, Mayar Ashraf, Afify, Yasmine M., Badr, Nagwa Lotfy, Helal, Nivin A.·2025·Scientific Reports

Abstract

Skin cancer is the abnormal growth of skin cells, most often developing on skin exposed to the sun. It is among the most fatal forms of cancer, making its early detection and therapy crucial. In addition to conventional techniques, deep learning methods are increasingly utilized for accurate identification and classification. This study proposes a convolutional neural network (CNN) model using transfer learning to detect and classify multiple types of skin cancer. This study focuses on evaluating the efficacy of transfer learning techniques in enhancing CNN performance for this critical task. A significant contribution of this study is the use of transfer learning to improve CNN performance in skin cancer detection and classification by leveraging pre-trained models, including ResNet50, Xception, MobileNet, EfficientNetB0, and DenseNet121. The integration of metadata demonstrated a significant improvement in accuracy compared to using images alone, enhancing the performance of most models. Further enhancement was achieved through ensemble techniques, specifically an adaptive weighted ensemble method, which dynamically assigns weights to individual models based on their performance, resulting in superior overall accuracy. SMOTE was used as an oversampling technique to address class imbalance. The proposed fusion of pre-trained models (ResNet50, Xception, and EfficientNetB0) combined with metadata achieved 93.2% accuracy, 93% precision, 93% recall, 93% F1 score, and 97.3% AUC on the ISIC 2018 dataset. On the ISIC 2019 dataset, it achieved 91.1% accuracy, 92% precision, 93% recall, 92% F1 score, and 95.5% AUC, surpassing many state-of-the-art methods. Experiments on an external dataset, Derm7pt, resulted in 82.5% accuracy, with a precision of 86%, recall of 83%, F1 score of 84% and AUC of 89.15%, demonstrating the improved interpretability and generalization of the proposed model. The proposed ensemble model optimizes deep learning for healthcare applications, enhancing dermatological diagnosis and treatment strategies for skin cancer patients.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-025-30534-z

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. [27]Nugroho, E. S., Ardiyanto, I. & Nugroho, H. A. Addressing imbalance ISIC-2019 dataset in dermoscopic pigmented skin lesion classification. ICIC Express Lett. 18 (6), 563–573 (2024).
  2. [38]Tabibi, S. T., Nikravanshalmani, A. & Saboohi, H. An ensemble classifier based on diverse convolutional neural networks for skin lesions classification. IEEE Access 12, 10634499. 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.10634499 (2024). · DOI
  3. [43]Kawahara, J., Daneshvar, S., Argenziano, G. & Hamarneh, G. Seven-point checklist and skin lesion classification using multitask multimodal neural nets. IEEE J. Biomed. Health Inform. 23 (2), 538–546. 10.1109/JBHI.2018.2839603 (2019). 29993994 · DOI
  4. [45]Gujjar, A. S. & PrasannaKumar, R. Image classification and prediction using transfer learning in Colab. In 2020 International Conference on Electronics and Sustainable Communication Systems (ICESC), Coimbatore, India, 2020, pp. 302–307.
  5. [51]Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I. & Hinton, G. E. ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In Proceedings of Advances in Neural Information and Processing Systems (NIPS), Lake Tahoe, NV, USA, Dec. 2012, pp. 1097–1105.
  6. [56]Zhang, R. et al. Towards Balance adaptive weighted ensemble clustering. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst 10.1109/TNNLS.2023.3340423 (2023).37030753 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Saeed, M. A., Afify, Y. M., Badr, N. L., & Helal, N. A.
Affiliations
Ain Shams University (EG)
Corresponding author
Saeed, Mayar Ashraf
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-12-30
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
45660-45660
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7117537301
Cited by
7
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 7
FWCI
2.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Ain Shams University
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
Keywords
skin cancer detection, skin cancer classification, transfer learning, convolutional neural networks, multimodal fusion, image metadata, SMOTE, class imbalance, pre-trained models, ISIC 2018, ISIC 2019, dermatological diagnosis
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Humans, Skin Neoplasms, Neural Networks, Computer

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review