ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2025
Habitat analysis based on magnetic resonance imaging for the prediction of prostate cancer: a dual-center study.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The application of habitat analysis is anticipated to enhance the diagnostic efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in prostate cancer (PCa) by providing a more accurate reflection of the microenvironmental characteristics within the lesion. The objective of this study was to investigate the feasibility of multisequence and multiregional MRI-based habitat analysis in the differentiation of PCa and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the data of 673 cases from The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University and The First Hospital of Xiushui who received MRI examination of the prostate and pathologically confirmed diagnosis of PCa or BPH. Habitat features and classical radiomic features from the regions of lesions and prostate gland (PG) were extracted for model construction. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to assess the performance of the models. An integrated nomogram combining dominant models and clinical variables was ultimately constructed. In addition, we further assessed the performance of the nomogram in a subgroup of early-stage lesions without capsular invasion (CIV). The Delong test was used to compare the differences in the area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) between models. Results: The AUCs of the habitat radiomics score (rad-score) based on the lesion (LHrad-score) in both the internal (0.898) and external validation (0.878) sets were higher than those of the rad-score based on the lesion (0.860 and 0.854, respectively). The AUCs of the classical rad-score based on PG (PCrad-score; 0.883 and 0.865 in the internal and external sets, respectively) were higher than those of the habitat rad-score based on PG (0.871 and 0.773, respectively). By combining the PCrad-score and LHrad-score with clinically independent predictors, the nomogram yielded AUCs of 0.899 and 0.963 in the internal and external sets, respectively. Discrimination between early-stage PCa and BPH in the overall validation set yielded an AUC of 0.802. Conclusions: The habitat analysis may serve as a means to noninvasively and preoperatively identifying PCa from BPH, even in the early stages of PCa.
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.