ArticleBMC urology2023
Prediction model of gleason score upgrading after radical prostatectomy based on a bayesian network.
Article in BMC urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- ISUP Grade Group Migration Between Prostate Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review of Emerging Predictors.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Development and validation of an interpretable machine learning model for predicting Gleason score upgrade in prostate cancer.Translational andrology and urology · 2025Article
- Comparative efficacy of radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy in the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the clinical value of the Gleason score upgrading (GSU) prediction model after radical prostatectomy (RP) based on a Bayesian network.
methodsThe data of 356 patients who underwent prostate biopsy and RP in our hospital from January 2018 to May 2021 were retrospectively analysed. Fourteen risk factors, including age, body mass index (BMI), total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA), prostate volume, total prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD), the number and proportion of positive biopsy cores, PI-RADS score, clinical stage and postoperative pathological characteristics, were included in the analysis. Data were used to establish a prediction model for Gleason score elevation based on the tree augmented naive (TAN) Bayesian algorithm. Moreover, the Bayesia Lab validation function was used to calculate the importance of polymorphic Birnbaum according to the results of the posterior analysis and to obtain the importance of each risk factor.
resultsIn the overall cohort, 110 patients (30.89%) had GSU. Based on all of the risk factors that were included in this study, the AUC of the model was 81.06%, and the accuracy was 76.64%. The importance ranking results showed that lymphatic metastasis, the number of positive biopsy cores, ISUP stage and PI-RADS score were the top four influencing factors for GSU after RP.
conclusionsThe prediction model of GSU after RP based on a Bayesian network has high accuracy and can more accurately evaluate the Gleason score of prostate biopsy specimens and guide treatment decisions.
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.