ArticleWorld journal of urology2025
Diagnosis and risk stratification of PI-RADS v2.1 category 3-5 lesions using amide proton transfer imaging.
Article in World journal of urology, 2025. 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.
- MR-based techniques for imaging prostate cancer metabolism: current status and future perspectives.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- Development and validation of a risk prediction model for prostate cancer integrating quantitative MRI and clinical data.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo explore the value of amide proton transfer-weighted imaging (APTWI) combined with apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) in evaluating the risk of aggressive PI-RADS v2.1 category 3-5 lesions. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed clinical and MRI features of 69 patients with prostate cancer (PCa) and 32 patients with benign prostatic lesion (BL). The PCa group was classified into Gleason Grade Groups (GG) 1 to 4 based on Gleason Score (GS). APTWI parameters, ADC, and PSAD were compared among the different groups. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and precision recall (PR) curve were used to assess the diagnostic accuracy of each parameter, and Spearman rank correlation was used to analyze the relationship between APTWI parameters and GS.
resultsAPTWI parameters and PSAD were significantly higher in the PCa group than that in the BL group, whereas ADC was significantly lower in the PCa group than in the BL group. ADC showed the highest AUC in the diagnosis of PCa, followed by PSAD and APT
conclusionIn PI-RADS v2.1 category 3-5 lesions, APT can serve as an important biomarker for the risk stratification of PCa, and combining APT with PSAD and ADC achieves the highest diagnostic efficacy.
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.