Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41467190›Full record

ReviewAsian journal of urology2025

Advancements in artificial intelligence for prostate cancer: Optimizing diagnosis, treatment, and prognostic assessment.

Yuki Arita, Christian Roest, Thomas C Kwee, Ramesh Paudyal, Alfonso Lema-Dopico, Stefan Fransen, Daisuke Hirahara, Eichi Takaya, Ryo Ueda, Lisa Ruby and 4 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Asian journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. AI for screening in healthcare: promise and challenges.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Yuki AritaDepartments of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Christian RoestDepartment of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Thomas C KweeDepartment of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Ramesh PaudyalDepartment of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Alfonso Lema-DopicoDepartment of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Stefan FransenDepartment of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Daisuke HiraharaDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Imaging Informatics, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Kawasaki, Japan.
Eichi TakayaDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Imaging Informatics, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Kawasaki, Japan.
Ryo UedaOffice of Radiation Technology, Keio University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Lisa RubyDepartments of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Noam NissanDepartments of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Lawrence H SchwartzDepartments of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Amita Shukla-DaveDepartments of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Oguz AkinDepartments of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI SELWYN M VICKERS · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This review provides a comprehensive overview of the current research landscape on artificial intelligence (AI) in prostate cancer (PCa) management, highlighting its potential to enhance diagnosis, improve medical image quality, facilitate risk stratification, and aid prognosis. The review also identifies opportunities and challenges associated with integrating AI into clinical practice. Methods: This review synthesizes findings from recent studies on AI applications in PCa management. It examines the use of machine learning and deep learning techniques in diagnostic imaging, surgical skill assessment, and outcome prediction. The analysis emphasizes empirical evidence demonstrating the efficacy and limitations of AI models in clinical settings. Results: AI, particularly machine learning and deep learning algorithms, is improving diagnostic accuracy by analyzing medical images with greater efficiency and precision compared to traditional methods. AI-based tools are also being developed for surgical skill assessment, offering objective evaluations and feedback to surgeons. Additionally, AI applications in predicting patient outcomes are facilitating the creation of personalized treatment plans. Empirical evidence shows that AI models exhibit higher sensitivity and specificity in detecting clinically significant PCa, outperforming conventional diagnostic techniques. Conclusion: AI holds significant promise for transforming PCa management by improving diagnostic accuracy, personalizing treatment plans, and enhancing patient outcomes. While the evidence underscores its potential, challenges such as the need for larger, more diverse datasets and addressing implementation barriers remain critical. Despite these hurdles, the benefits of AI in PCa management represent a compelling area for future research and clinical integration.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceCTDeep learningMachine learningMRIPathologyProstate cancerRadiomics

Identifiers

PMID41467190
PMCPMC12744706

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.