ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2026
The potential use of artificial intelligence in reviewing atypical small acinar proliferation in prostate core biopsy.
Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prostate cancer is the most common diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death among men in the United States. The gold standard for the diagnosis of prostate cancer is the examination of tissue from a systemic 12- or 14-core biopsy procedure by an anatomic pathologist. Atypical small acinar proliferation in prostate core biopsy is an indefinite diagnosis, and may cause difficulties in clinical management. To investigate the potential use of artificial intelligence in reviewing atypical small acinar proliferation, Paige Prostate, an FDA-approved artificial intelligence-based digital diagnostic system, was used to review the digital images of 107 cores with an initial diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation. Two pathologists blindly reclassified the cores with a new diagnosis (either benign or malignant) for 85% of the cases (pathologist #1) and 88% (pathologist #2), respectively. Paige Prostate resulted in consistent diagnosis in 85% of the cores ("suspicious" or "not suspicious"). The consistency rates were 77% between the two pathologists, 66% and 75% between Paige Prostate and each pathologist. There was statistically significant agreement among the three consistency rates. Although some degree of interobserver discrepancy still exists, our findings indicate that artificial intelligence was compatible with the pathologist review, and it can be a unique diagnostic adjunct for pathologists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40471248What 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.