ArticlePloS one2025
Integrating multimodal imaging and peritumoral features for enhanced prostate cancer diagnosis: A machine learning approach.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multimodal artificial intelligence for prostate cancer imaging: workflow-relevant fusion of mpMRI, PSMA PET, ultrasound, and clinical data for diagnosis, local staging, and treatment personalization.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- Tumor microenvironment-mediated immune evasion and resistance in prostate cancer: mechanisms, cross-talk, and therapeutic opportunities.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProstate cancer is a common malignancy in men, and accurately distinguishing between benign and malignant nodules at an early stage is crucial for optimizing treatment. Multimodal imaging (such as ADC and T2) plays an important role in the diagnosis of prostate cancer, but effectively combining these imaging features for accurate classification remains a challenge.
methodsThis retrospective study included MRI data from 199 prostate cancer patients. Radiomic features from both the tumor and peritumoral regions were extracted, and a random forest model was used to select the most contributive features for classification. Three machine learning models-Random Forest, XGBoost, and Extra Trees-were then constructed and trained on four different feature combinations (tumor ADC, tumor T2, tumor ADC+T2, and tumor + peritumoral ADC+T2).
resultsThe model incorporating multimodal imaging features and peritumoral characteristics showed superior classification performance. The Extra Trees model outperformed the others across all feature combinations, particularly in the tumor + peritumoral ADC+T2 group, where the AUC reached 0.729. The AUC values for the other combinations also exceeded 0.65. While the Random Forest and XGBoost models performed slightly lower, they still demonstrated strong classification abilities, with AUCs ranging from 0.63 to 0.72. SHAP analysis revealed that key features, such as tumor texture and peritumoral gray-level features, significantly contributed to the model's classification decisions.
conclusionThe combination of multimodal imaging data with peritumoral features moderately improved the accuracy of prostate cancer classification. This model provides a non-invasive and effective diagnostic tool for clinical use and supports future personalized treatment decisions.
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.