ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2025
Artificial intelligence-assisted enhancement of prostate volume metrics in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer: a retrospective analysis.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms provide reliable prostate volume (PV) measurements across various magnetic resonance imaging devices, their impact on prostate cancer risk stratification for patients with a Gleason score of 6 remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the benefits of integrating AI-derived PV and transitional or peripheral zone volume (TZV/PZV) measurements with clinical factors to improve prostate-cancer risk stratification. Methods: Our retrospective cohort included 560 patients with biopsy-confirmed Gleason score 6, stratified based on the outcome of radical prostatectomy as clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC) and clinically insignificant prostate cancer (insPC). We used AI methods for accurate PV and TZV/PZV estimation based on the origin virtual net (Vnet) and with cascade (coarse and fine) Vnet, the best-performing volume segmentation network in the subsequent analysis. We then developed predictive models incorporating clinical factors including age, prostate serum antigen levels, Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, positivity in transitional-zone or peripheral-zone biopsy, number of positive cores (foundational model), and novel models integrating PV (model 1) and TZV/PZV (model 2). The efficacy of these models was assessed by the receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC). Results: For prostate segmentation, the fine cascade Vnet performed best with a Dice similarity coefficient of 0.93 for the whole prostate, 0.82 for the transitional zone, and 0.85 for the peripheral zone. The comparative discriminative power of the three models between csPC and insPC was assessed using the test dataset, indicating an AUC of 0.698 for the foundational model, 0.712 for model 1, and 0.730 for model 2. Model 2 significantly outperformed model 1 (P=0.045) and the foundational model (P=0.005) in distinguishing between csPC and insPC. Model 1 also showed statistically significant improvement over the foundational model (P=0.023). Conclusions: Incorporating AI-driven PV and TZV/PZV measurements with clinical parameters improves prostate-cancer risk stratification.
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.