ArticleBMC cancer2025
Automated machine learning for prostate cancer detection and Gleason score prediction using T2WI: a diagnostic multi-center study.
Article in BMC cancer, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProstate cancer (PCa) is one of the most common malignancies in men, and accurate assessment of tumor aggressiveness is crucial for treatment planning. The Gleason score (GS) remains the gold standard for risk stratification, yet it relies on invasive biopsy, which has inherent risks and sampling errors. The aim of this study was to detect PCa and non-invasively predict the GS for the early detection and stratification of clinically significant cases.
methodsWe used single-modality T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) with an automatic machine-learning (ML) approach, MLJAR. The internal dataset comprised PCa patients who underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations at our hospital from September 2015 to June 2022 prior to prostate biopsy, surgery, radiotherapy, and endocrine therapy and whose examinations resulted in pathological findings. An external dataset from another medical center and a public challenge dataset were used for external validation. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov curve was used to evaluate the risk-differentiation ability of the PCa detection model. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated with confidence intervals to compare the model performance. The internal MRI dataset included 198 non-PCa and 291 PCa patients with histopathological results obtained through biopsy or surgery. External and public challenge datasets included 45 and 68 PCa patients, respectively.
resultsAUC for PCa detection in the internal-testing cohort (n = 147, PCa = 78) was 0.99. For GS prediction, AUCs were GS = 3 + 3 (0.97), GS = 3 + 4 (0.97), GS = 3 + 5 (1.0), GS = 4 + 3 (0.87), GS = 4 + 4 (0.91), GS = 4 + 5 (0.95), GS = 5 + 4 (1.0), and GS = 5 + 5 (0.99) in the internal-testing cohort (PCa = 88); GS = 3 + 3 (0.95), GS = 3 + 4 (0.76); GS = 3 + 5 (0.77), GS = 4 + 3 (0.88), GS = 4 + 4 (0.82), GS = 4 + 5 (0.87), GS = 5 + 4 (0.95), and GS = 5 + 5 (0.85) in the external-testing cohort (PCa = 45); and GS = 3 + 4 (0.89), GS = 4 + 3 (0.75), GS = 4 + 4 (0.65), and GS = 4 + 5 (0.91) in the public challenge cohort (PCa = 68).
conclusionsThis multi-center study shows that an auto-ML model using only T2WI can accurately detect PCa and predict Gleason scores non-invasively, offering potential to reduce biopsy reliance and improve early risk stratification. These results warrant further validation and exploration for integration into clinical workflows.
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.