ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2022
Integrative Machine Learning Prediction of Prostate Biopsy Results From Negative Multiparametric MRI.
Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic Performance of Prostate-specific Antigen Density for Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Era of Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.European urology oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Next-Generation Advances in Prostate Cancer Imaging and Artificial Intelligence Applications.Journal of imaging · 2025Review
- Prediction of prostate biopsy outcomes at different cut-offs of prostate-specific antigen using machine learning: a multicenter study.Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
- Comparison of intensity normalization methods in prostate, brain, and breast cancer multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- AtPCa-Net: anatomical-aware prostate cancer detection network on multi-parametric MRI.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- What benefit can be obtained from magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis with artificial intelligence in prostate cancer compared with clinical assessments?Military Medical Research · 2023Review
- Machine Learning-Based Models Enhance the Prediction of Prostate Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMultiparametric MRI (mpMRI) is commonly recommended as a triage test prior to any prostate biopsy. However, there exists limited consensus on which patients with a negative prostate mpMRI could avoid prostate biopsy. PURPOSE: To identify which patient could safely avoid prostate biopsy when the prostate mpMRI is negative, via a radiomics-based machine learning approach. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. SUBJECTS: Three hundred thirty patients with negative prostate 3T mpMRI between January 2016 and December 2018 were included. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: A 3.0 T/T2-weighted turbo spin echo (TSE) imaging (T ASSESSMENT: The integrative machine learning (iML) model was trained to predict negative prostate biopsy results, utilizing both radiomics and clinical features. The final study cohort comprised 330 consecutive patients with negative mpMRI (PI-RADS < 3) who underwent systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) or MR-ultrasound fusion (MRUS) biopsy within 6 months. A secondary analysis of biopsy naïve subcohort (n = 227) was also conducted. STATISTICAL TESTS: The Mann-Whitney U test and Chi-Squared test were utilized to evaluate the significance of difference of clinical features between prostate biopsy positive and negative groups. The model performance was validated using leave-one-out cross-validation (LOOCV) and measured by AUC, sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value (NPV).
resultsOverall, 306/330 (NPV 92.7%) of the final study cohort patients had negative biopsies, and 207/227 (NPV 91.2%) of the biopsy naïve subcohort patients had negative biopsies. Our iML model achieved NPVs of 98.3% and 98.0% for the study cohort and subcohort, respectively, superior to prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD)-based risk assessment with NPVs of 94.9% and 93.9%, respectively. DATA
conclusionThe proposed iML model achieved high performance in predicting negative prostate biopsy results for patients with negative mpMRI. With improved NPVs, the proposed model can be used to stratify patients who in whom we might obviate biopsies, thus reducing the number of unnecessary biopsies. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.