Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40055229›Full record

ReviewEuropean radiology2025

AI and human interactions in prostate cancer diagnosis using MRI.

Anwar R Padhani, Nickolas Papanikolaou

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Integrating Artificial Intelligence into Prostate MR Imaging: Technical Foundations, Clinical Applications, and Workflow Implications.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. The evolving PI-RADS paradigm.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Modern integrative prostate cancer diagnostics.Current opinion in urology · 2026
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
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

2 authors.

Anwar R PadhaniPaul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK. anwar.padhani@stricklandscanner.org.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5830-5777
Nickolas PapanikolaouComputational Clinical Imaging Group, Centre for the Unknown, Champalimaud Foundation Lisbon, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3298-2072

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This special report explores the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into prostate MRI workflows to address limitations associated with single-reader interpretations, such as inter-reader variability and diagnostic errors. We review various AI-integrated workflow strategies, from AI-assisted decision support to fully autonomous analysis, examining their benefits and challenges. AI can act as a second reader, enhancing detection sensitivity and reducing false negatives or pre-screen cases for efficient triage, thereby optimising radiologist workload. Key advantages include the potential for improved lesion detection, streamlined workflows, and reduced reporting times. However, challenges such as automation bias and the potential for inaccurate AI outputs require careful consideration and mitigation strategies. The suitability of different AI workflows is dependent on the clinical context and desired performance, with high sensitivity and negative predictive value crucial for rule-out scenarios and high specificity and positive predictive value essential for rule-in scenarios. Increased AI autonomy mandates a higher performance benchmark. The need for rigorous prospective validation studies assessing AI safety and effectiveness in real-world clinical settings is emphasised. Furthermore, the complex dynamics of human-AI interaction, encompassing positive and negative consequences, warrant further investigation. Ultimately, the strategic implementation of collaborative AI-radiologist workflows has the potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy and efficiency and reduce missed cancers, leading to more timely and appropriate patient care. KEY POINTS: Question Single-reader prostate MRI interpretations have reader variability and missed cancer limitations. This report explores how prospective AI integration can improve diagnostic accuracy and workflow efficiency. Findings From decision support to autonomous analyses, AI workflows can improve cancer detection and streamline workflows. Mitigating errors requires tailored performance and high accuracy for greater autonomy. Clinical relevance Calibrated AI-radiologist collaborations can enhance prostate cancer diagnosis by improving accuracy and efficiency while reducing unnecessary biopsies and missed cancers. Prospective research evaluating the safety and efficacy of AI deployment is needed for responsible and beneficial AI adoption.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingProstatic NeoplasmsHumansMaleSensitivity and SpecificityWorkflowArtificial intelligenceClinical workflowMRI diagnosisProstate cancer

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.