Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37485455›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2023

Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Radiomics Features with Nomogram for Prediction of Prostate Cancer Invasion.

Yang Liu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of general medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yang LiuX-Ray Department, The No.1 People's Hospital of Huzhou, Huzhou, Zhejiang, 313000, People's Republic of China.
Third People's Hospital of Huzhou · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To explore the value of the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) radiomics model in predicting prostate cancer (PCa) invasion. Methods: Clinical data of 86 pathologically confirmed PCa patients in our hospital were collected, including 44 cases in the invasive group and 42 cases in the non-invasive group. All patients underwent MRI examinations, and the same parameters were used. The lesion area was manually delineated and the radiomics features were extracted from T2WI. The radiomics signature based on LASSO regression was established. Besides, logistic regression was used to identify independent clinical predictors, and a combined model incorporating the radiomics signature and independent clinical risk factor was constructed. Finally, the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis and decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed to compare the prediction efficiency and clinical benefit of each model. Results: A total of 867 radiomics features were obtained, and six of them were incorporated into the radiomics model. Multivariate logistic regression analysis exhibited the Gleason score as an independent clinical risk factor for PCa invasion. ROC results showed that the performance of the radiomics model was comparable to that of the clinical-radiomics model in predicting PCa invasion, and it was better than that of the single Gleason score. DCA also confirmed the considerable clinical application value of the radiomics and the clinical-radiomics models. Conclusion: As a simple, non-invasive, and efficient method, the radiomics model has important predictive value for PCa invasion.

Indexed as

invasionmachine learningmagnetic resonance imagingprostate cancerradiomics

Identifiers

PMID37485455
PMCPMC10361087
OpenAlexW4384562208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.