Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40160627›Full record

ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2025

Improved prostate cancer diagnosis: upgraded prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) scores by zoomed diffusion-weighted imaging enhance deep-learning-based computer-aided diagnosis accuracy.

Haining Long, Lei Hu, Liming Wei, Lisong Dai, Caixia Fu, Yichen Lu, Cancan Xu, Zhonghua Hu, Lei Wang, Zhihan Xu and 18 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

28 authors.

Haining LongDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-4597-7458
Lei HuDepartment of Radiology, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Liming WeiDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Lisong DaiDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Caixia FuMagnetic Resonance Application Development, Siemens Shenzhen Magnetic Resonance Ltd., Shenzhen, China.
Yichen LuDigital Health, Siemens Healthineers Digital Technology (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Cancan XuDigital Development, Siemens Digital Medical Technology (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Zhonghua HuDigital & Automation, Siemens Shanghai Medical Equipment Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Lei WangDigital & Automation, Siemens Shanghai Medical Equipment Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Zhihan XuDiagnostic Imaging Computed Tomography Collaboration, Siemens Healthineers, Shanghai, China.
Robert GrimmMagnetic Resonance Application Predevelopment, Siemens Healthineers, Erlangen, Germany.
Heinrich von BuschDiagnostic Imaging Digital & Automation, Siemens Healthineers, Erlangen, Germany.
Thomas BenkertMagnetic Resonance Application Predevelopment, Siemens Healthineers, Erlangen, Germany.
Ali KamenDigital Technology and Innovation, Siemens Healthineers, Princeton, NJ, USA.
Bin LouDigital Technology and Innovation, Siemens Healthineers, Princeton, NJ, USA.
Henkjan HuismanDepartment of Radiology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Angela TongDepartment of Radiology, New York University, New York, NY, USA.
Tobias PenzkoferCharité, Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Moon Hyung ChoiDepartment of Radiology, Eunpyeong St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Ivan ShabuninPatero Clinic, Moscow, Russia.
David WinkelDepartment of Radiology, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Pengyi XingDepartment of Radiology, 989th Hospital of The Joint Logistic Support Force of the Chinese People's Liberation Army, Luoyang, China.
Dieter SzolarDiagnostikum Graz Süd-West, Graz, Austria.
Fergus CoakleyDiagnostic Radiology, School of Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Steven M SheaDepartment of Radiology, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA.
Edyta Szurowska2nd Department of Radiology, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland.
Wangshu ZhuDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Jungong ZhaoDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: A new diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) technique, known as zoomed-field-of-view echo-planar DWI (z-DWI), has been developed to reduce geometric distortions and susceptibility artifacts and to achieve higher spatial resolution. However, it remains unclear whether z-DWI, compared with the traditional DWI technique, can enhance the diagnostic performance of deep-learning-based computer-aided diagnosis (DL-CAD) and radiologists using DL-CAD in detecting prostate cancer (PCa). This study aims to evaluate and compare the diagnostic performance and PI-RADS scores of DL-CAD in detecting PCa using conventional full-field-of-view single-shot echo-planar DWI (f-DWI) and advanced z-DWI and to extend this comparison to clinical practice, in which radiologists use DL-CAD. Methods: This study retrospectively included magnetic resonance imaging from 359 patients for suspected PCa. There were 496 prostate lesions included, with 253 (51%) being malignant. Using a DL-CAD system, images of f-DWI and z-DWI were uploaded separately to obtain the localizations and the prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) scores of suspected malignant lesions. The results were compared to histopathologic results. The diagnostic performance of f-DWI and z-DWI were evaluated using the free-response receiver operating characteristics and the alternative free-response receiver operating characteristics curves. Discrepancies in PI-RADS scores were analyzed. Additionally, two radiologists participated in consensus reading images by using DL-CAD with different DWI techniques, and their performance and PI-RADS scores were compared. Lastly, the relationship between PI-RADS discrepancies and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) risk was analyzed. Results: z-DWI enabled DL-CAD to exhibit better diagnostic performance [area under the curve (AUC), 0.857 Conclusions: z-DWI, in comparison to f-DWI, enhances the diagnostic performance of DL-CAD for PCa, assigning higher PI-RADS scores to malignant lesions. Despite offering limited improvement for radiologists using DL-CAD, z-DWI shows promise in enhancing the detection of csPCa.

Indexed as

Deep-learning-based computer-aided diagnosis (DL-CAD)prostate cancer (PCa)prostate imaging reporting and data system score (PI-RADS score)zoomed-field-of-view echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging (z-DWI)

Identifiers

PMID40160627
PMCPMC11948435

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.