ArticleNPJ precision oncology2025
Mitigating bias in prostate cancer diagnosis using synthetic data for improved AI driven Gleason grading.
Article in NPJ precision oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting inguinal lymph node metastasis in penile squamous cell carcinoma, from imaging, molecular biomarkers to multimodal AI: a narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Review
- Unbiased Artificial Intelligence: Addressing Bias in Computational Pathology.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2025Review
- Computational Pathology with Topological signatures and Visual Word Encoding.Research square · 2025Article
- Prioritizing human-AI collaboration in healthcare: the TRIAD framework for trustworthy governance, real-world, and integrated adaptive deployment.Military Medical Research · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Prostate cancer (PCa) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality in men, with Gleason grading critical for prognosis and treatment decisions. Machine learning (ML) models offer potential for automated grading but are limited by dataset biases, staining variability, and data scarcity, reducing their generalizability. This study employs generative adversarial networks (GANs) to generate high-quality synthetic histopathological images to address these challenges. A conditional GAN (dcGAN) was developed and validated using expert pathologist review and Spatial Heterogeneous Recurrence Quantification Analysis (SHRQA), achieving 80% diagnostic quality approval. A convolutional neural network (EfficientNet) was trained on original and synthetic images and validated across TCGA, PANDA Challenge, and MAST trial datasets. Integrating synthetic images improved classification accuracy for Gleason 3 (26%, p = 0.0010), Gleason 4 (15%, p = 0.0274), and Gleason 5 (32%, p < 0.0001), with sensitivity and specificity reaching 81% and 92%, respectively. This study demonstrates that synthetic data significantly enhances ML-based Gleason grading accuracy and improves reproducibility, providing a scalable AI-driven solution for precision oncology.
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.