ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2025
Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification and Scan Tailoring Using Deep Learning on Abbreviated Prostate MRI.
Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep learning-based prostate cancer diagnosis on MRI with hip prostheses: artifact and sequence effects.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Precision Risk Stratification in Prostate Cancer: Unveiling MRI-Based Habitat-Driven Radiomics Model for Enhanced Treatment Guidance.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Deep learning classification of significant prostate cancer on MRI: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- AI-based prostate volume estimation from multi-planar MRI under variable acquisition protocols.European journal of radiology open · 2026Article
- Current Applications and Future Directions of Artificial Intelligence in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: A Narrative Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Prostate MRI: Addressing Current Limitations Through Emerging Technologies.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2026Review
- Article
- Overcoming MRI accessibility barriers in cancer imaging with cutting-edge solutions.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025Article
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
Abstract
backgroundMRI plays a critical role in prostate cancer (PCa) detection and management. Bi-parametric MRI (bpMRI) offers a faster, contrast-free alternative to multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI). Routine use of mpMRI for all patients may not be necessary, and a tailored imaging approach (bpMRI or mpMRI) based on individual risk might optimize resource utilization. PURPOSE: To develop and evaluate a deep learning (DL) model for classifying clinically significant PCa (csPCa) using bpMRI and to assess its potential for optimizing MRI protocol selection by recommending the additional sequences of mpMRI only when beneficial. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective and prospective. POPULATION: The DL model was trained and validated on 26,129 prostate MRI studies. A retrospective cohort of 151 patients (mean age 65 ± 8) with ground-truth verification from biopsy, prostatectomy, or long-term follow-up, alongside a prospective cohort of 142 treatment-naïve patients (mean age 65 ± 9) undergoing bpMRI, was evaluated. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3 T, Turbo-spin echo T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) and single shot EPI diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI). ASSESSMENT: The DL model, based on a 3D ResNet-50 architecture, classified csPCa using PI-RADS ≥ 3 and Gleason ≥ 7 as outcome measures. The model was evaluated on a prospective cohort labeled by consensus of three radiologists and a retrospective cohort with ground truth verification based on biopsy or long-term follow-up. Real-time inference was tested on an automated MRI workflow, providing classification results directly at the scanner. STATISTICAL TESTS: AUROC with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was used to evaluate model performance.
resultsIn the prospective cohort, the model achieved an AUC of 0.83 (95% CI: 0.77-0.89) for PI-RADS ≥ 3 classification, with 93% sensitivity and 54% specificity. In the retrospective cohort, the model achieved an AUC of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.80-0.91) for Gleason ≥ 7 classification, with 93% sensitivity and 62% specificity. Real-time implementation demonstrated a processing latency of 14-16 s for protocol recommendations. DATA
conclusionThe proposed DL model identifies csPCa using bpMRI and integrates it into clinical workflows. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 1. TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
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.