ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Construction of a clinically significant prostate cancer risk prediction model based on traditional diagnostic methods.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multi-regional Multiparametric Deep Learning Radiomics for Diagnosis of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Evolution of the prostate cancer diagnostic paradigm: integrated evidence and clinical pathways from targeted biopsy to biopsy-free strategy.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: to construct a prediction model for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, digital rectal examination (DRE), and transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS). Methods: We retrospectively analysed 1196 Asian patients who underwent transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUSB) between June 2000 and February 2023. Patients were randomly divided into a training set of 837 cases (70%) and a validation set of 359 patients (30%). A csPCa risk prediction model was established using the logistic regression. The performance of the model was examined based on calibration curves, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, decision curve analysis (DCA), and clinical impact curves (CIC). Results: Serum PSA levels, age, DRE results, prostatic shape, prostatic border and hypoechoic area were associated with pathological outcomes. The area under the ROC curve of the training set was 0.890 (95%CI: 0.865-0.816). The optimal cut-off value was 0.279. The calibration curves indicated good calibration, and the DCA and CIC results demonstrated good clinical utility. Significantly, the prediction model has higher negative predictive value (89.8%) and positive predictive value (68.0%) compared with MRI. Subsequently, we developed an online calculator (https://jiwentong0.shinyapps.io/dynnomapp/) with six variables for biopsy optimization. Conclusion: This study incorporated the results of three traditional diagnostic methods to establish a cost-effective and highly accurate model for predicting csPCa before biopsy. With this model, we aim to provide a non-invasive and cost-effective tool for csPCa detection in Asia and other underdeveloped areas.
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.