ReviewQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2025
Risk prediction models for biochemical recurrence of Chinese prostate cancer patients after radical prostatectomy based on magnetic resonance imaging examination: a systematic review.
Review 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. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) affects the prognosis of patients and early accurate prediction is crucial. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is of great value in the assessment of prostate cancer (PCa). However, there is a lack of a systematic summary of the current research status for the construction of a postoperative BCR prediction model applicable to Chinese PCa patients based on MRI features. This study aimed to systematically evaluate the predictive performance and clinical applicability of the available models. Methods: A standardized search of relevant literature in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang Data, and CBM databases was performed, with the search time restricted to the establishment of the database to 11 September 2024. Studies that developed and/or validated prediction models based on MRI examination to identify and/or predict BCR in patients after RP in China were included. Two researchers independently screened the literature and used the prediction model risk of bias assessment tool to assess the quality of research on the prediction models and performed descriptive analyses of predictor variables for modeling. Results: A total of 17 studies were included, and 41 prediction models for BCR risk in Chinese patients after RP based on MRI examination were constructed, with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) or concordance index (C-index) of the cases ranging from 0.610 to 0.982. A total of 36 prediction models had good predictive performance, eight studies performed model calibration, two studies performed internal validation, two studies performed external validation, and seven studies conducted both internal and external validation. The results of the quality assessment revealed that all 17 studies were at high risk of bias. The most frequent predictors were prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, MRI image features, and Gleason score. Conclusions: At present, a prediction model based on MRI examination for the risk of BCR in Chinese patients after RP is still in the development stage, and the overall quality of research needs to be further improved. In the future, the study design and reporting process should be improved, and the existing model should be validated to provide a basis for the development of effective prevention strategies.
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.