ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2024
Clinical value of a radiomics model based on machine learning for the prediction of prostate cancer.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based tools in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2026Pooled it
- Current Applications and Future Directions of Artificial Intelligence in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: A Narrative Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Review
- Enhanced ISUP grade prediction in prostate cancer using multi-center radiomics data.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveRadiomics models have demonstrated good performance for the diagnosis and evaluation of prostate cancer (PCa). However, there are currently no validated imaging models that can predict PCa or clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Therefore, we aimed to identify the best such models for the prediction of PCa and csPCa.
methodsWe performed a retrospective study of 942 patients with suspected PCa before they underwent prostate biopsy. MRI data were collected to manually segment suspicious regions of the tumor layer-by-layer. We then constructed models using the extracted imaging features. Finally, the clinical value of the models was evaluated.
resultsA diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) plus apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) random-forest model and a T2-weighted imaging plus ADC and DWI multilayer perceptron model were the best models for the prediction of PCa and csPCa, respectively. Areas under the curve (AUCs) of 0.942 and 0.999, respectively, were obtained for a training set. Internal validation yielded AUCs of 0.894 and 0.605, and external validation yielded AUCs of 0.732 and 0.623.
conclusionModels based on machine learning comprising radiomic features and clinical indicators showed good predictive efficiency for PCa and csPCa. These findings demonstrate the utility of radiomic models for clinical decision-making.
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.