Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39410530›Full record

ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Artificial Intelligence Algorithms and Their Current Role in the Identification and Comparison of Gleason Patterns in Prostate Cancer Histopathology: A Comprehensive Review.

Usman Khalid, Jasmin Gurung, Mladen Doykov, Gancho Kostov, Bozhidar Hristov, Petar Uchikov, Maria Kraeva, Krasimir Kraev, Daniel Doykov, Katya Doykova and 4 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

14 authors.

Usman KhalidMedical Faculty, Medical University of Plovdiv, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria.ORCID 0009-0004-9425-2539
Jasmin GurungMedical Faculty, Medical University of Plovdiv, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria.ORCID 0009-0007-7996-4433
Mladen DoykovDepartment of Urology and General Medicine, Medical Faculty, Medical University of Plovdiv, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria.ORCID 0000-0002-7029-8397
Gancho KostovDepartment of Special Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Medical University of Plovdiv, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria.
Bozhidar HristovSecond Department of Internal Diseases, Section "Gastroenterology", Medical Faculty, Medical University of Plovdiv, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria.ORCID 0000-0002-2943-1766
Petar UchikovDepartment of Special Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Medical University of Plovdiv, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria.
Maria KraevaDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Medical Faculty, Medical University of Plovdiv, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria.
Krasimir KraevDepartment of Propedeutics of Internal Diseases, Medical Faculty, Medical University of Plovdiv, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria.ORCID 0000-0002-1155-117X
Daniel DoykovSecond Department of Internal Diseases, Section "Gastroenterology", Medical Faculty, Medical University of Plovdiv, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria.ORCID 0000-0002-7627-0651
Katya DoykovaDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Medical Faculty, Medical University of Plovdiv, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria.
Siyana ValovaSecond Department of Internal Diseases, Section "Nephrology", Medical Faculty, Medical University of Plovdiv, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria.
Lyubomir ChervenkovDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Medical Faculty, Medical University of Plovdiv, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria.ORCID 0000-0002-8380-5992
Eduard TilkiyanSecond Department of Internal Diseases, Section "Nephrology", Medical Faculty, Medical University of Plovdiv, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria.ORCID 0000-0002-4091-4312
Krasimira EnevaDepartment of Infectious diseases, Parasitology and Tropical medicine, Medical University of Plovdiv, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of the Gleason grading system has proven to be an irreplaceable tool in prostate cancer diagnostics within urology. Despite the advancements and developments in diagnostics, there remains a discrepancy in the grading process among even the most experienced pathologists. AI algorithms have demonstrated potential in detecting cancer and assigning Gleason grades, offering a solution to the issue of significant variability among pathologists' evaluations. Our paper explores the evolving role of AI in prostate cancer histopathology, with a key focus on outcomes and the reliability of various AI algorithms for Gleason pattern assessment. We conducted a non-systematic review of the published literature to examine the role of artificial intelligence in Gleason pattern diagnostics. The PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched to gather pertinent information about recent advancements in artificial intelligence and their impact on Gleason patterns. We found that AI algorithms are increasingly being used to identify Gleason patterns in prostate cancer, with recent studies showing promising advancements that surpass traditional diagnostic methods. These findings highlight AI's potential to be integrated into clinical practice, enhancing pathologists' workflows and improving patient outcomes. The inter-observer variability in Gleason grading has seen an improvement in efficiency with the implementation of AI. Pathologists using AI have reported successful outcomes, demonstrating its effectiveness as a supplementary tool. While some refinements are still needed before AI can be fully implemented in clinical practice, its positive impact is anticipated soon.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceGleason patternhistopathologyprostate cancer

Identifiers

PMID39410530
PMCPMC11475684

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.