Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32560558›Full record

ArticleCancers2020

Automated Classification of Significant Prostate Cancer on MRI: A Systematic Review on the Performance of Machine Learning Applications.

Jose M Castillo T, Muhammad Arif, Wiro J Niessen, Ivo G Schoots, Jifke F Veenland

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05024162 (Can Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Prostate Combined With a Radiomics Evaluation Determine the Invasive Capacity of a Tumour), which is not on this map. Cited by 41 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05024162 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Can Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Prostate Combined With a Radiomics Evaluation Determine the Invasive Capacity of a Tumour (Can MRI-PREDICT)

TypeinterventionalSponsorNova Scotia Health AuthorityRan2022 to 2025Enrolled60ConditionsProstate CancerArmsMRT Accuracy, MRT Stability
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jose M Castillo TDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Muhammad ArifDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Wiro J NiessenDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Ivo G SchootsDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9804-0603
Jifke F VeenlandDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0456-6143
Erasmus MC · NL

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 14932
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Significant prostate carcinoma (sPCa) classification based on MRI using radiomics or deep learning approaches has gained much interest, due to the potential application in assisting in clinical decision-making.

objectiveTo systematically review the literature (i) to determine which algorithms are most frequently used for sPCa classification, (ii) to investigate whether there exists a relation between the performance and the method or the MRI sequences used, (iii) to assess what study design factors affect the performance on sPCa classification, and (iv) to research whether performance had been evaluated in a clinical setting Methods: The databases Embase and Ovid MEDLINE were searched for studies describing machine learning or deep learning classification methods discriminating between significant and nonsignificant PCa on multiparametric MRI that performed a valid validation procedure. Quality was assessed by the modified radiomics quality score. We computed the median area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) from overall methods and the interquartile range.

resultsFrom 2846 potentially relevant publications, 27 were included. The most frequent algorithms used in the literature for PCa classification are logistic regression (22%) and convolutional neural networks (CNNs) (22%). The median AUC was 0.79 (interquartile range: 0.77-0.87). No significant effect of number of included patients, image sequences, or reference standard on the reported performance was found. Three studies described an external validation and none of the papers described a validation in a prospective clinical trial.

conclusionsTo unlock the promising potential of machine and deep learning approaches, validation studies and clinical prospective studies should be performed with an established protocol to assess the added value in decision-making.

Indexed as

classificationclinically significantdeep learningGleason scoremachine learningmodelmpMRIpredictionprostate carcinomaradiomicssystematic review

Identifiers

PMID32560558
PMCPMC7352160
OpenAlexW3036809410

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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 OpenQuestion graph.