ArticleCommunications medicine2025
Artificial intelligence-assisted prostate cancer diagnosis for reduced use of immunohistochemistry.
Article in Communications medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence in digital pathology diagnosis and analysis: Technologies, clinical integration, and future prospects (Review).Biomedical reports · 2026Review
- [Between catheters and artificial intelligence: High-tech urology-where manual skills meet digital expertise].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- The impact of tissue detection on diagnostic artificial intelligence algorithms in prostate digital pathology.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Smart Lies and Sharp Eyes: Pragmatic Artificial Intelligence for Cancer Pathology: Promise, Pitfalls, and Access Pathways.Cancers · 2026Review
- Review
- Multimodal artificial intelligence in urologic precision oncology: from algorithm to translational medicine (a systemized narrative review).Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in prostate biopsy: diagnostic applications, risk stratification, and precision oncology.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProstate cancer diagnosis heavily relies on histopathological evaluation, which is subject to variability. While immunohistochemical staining (IHC) assists in distinguishing benign from malignant tissue, it increases workload, costs, and leads to diagnostic delays. Artificial intelligence (AI) presents a promising solution to reduce reliance on IHC by accurately classifying atypical glands and borderline morphologies in hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stained tissue sections.
methodsIn this study, we evaluated an AI model's ability to minimize IHC use without compromising diagnostic accuracy. We retrospectively analyzed prostate core needle biopsies from routine diagnostics at three different pathology sites. These cohorts consisted exclusively of diagnostically challenging cases where pathologists had required IHC to finalize the diagnosis.
resultsWe show that the AI model achieves high performance, with area under the curve values ranging from 0.951 to 0.993 for detecting cancer in routine H&E-stained slides. When applying sensitivity-prioritized diagnostic thresholds, the model reduces the need for IHC staining by 44.4%, 42.0%, and 20.7% across the three cohorts, without a single false negative prediction. Among slides with a benign ground truth label, IHC use is reduced by up to 80.6%.
conclusionsThis AI model shows promise for reducing unnecessary IHC use in difficult prostate biopsy cases while maintaining diagnostic safety. Its integration into clinical workflows could streamline decision-making in prostate pathology and alleviate resource burdens.
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.