ArticleBJUI compass2026
AI-enhanced micro-ultrasound improves detection of clinically significant prostate cancer at biopsy.
Article in BJUI compass, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- MUSegNet: Automated detection of clinically significant prostate cancer on micro-ultrasound.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2026Article
- From Detection to Surveillance: The Evolving Role of Micro-Ultrasound in Prostate Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: A Comparative Evaluation of Biological Techniques.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- AI-enhanced micro-ultrasound improves detection of clinically significant prostate cancer at biopsy.BJUI compass · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence (AI)-enhanced micro-ultrasound (micro-US) for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in men referred for prostate biopsy. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively analysed 145 men undergoing micro-US-guided biopsy (79 with csPCa, 66 without). Deep features were extracted from 2D micro-US slices using a self-supervised convolutional autoencoder and classified with a random forest model under fivefold cross-validation. Patients were considered csPCa-positive if ≥8 consecutive slices were predicted positive. Diagnostic performance was assessed against biopsy pathology using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Results: The AI-micro-US model achieved an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.871. At a fixed threshold, sensitivity was 92.5% and specificity 68.1%, outperforming a clinical model based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA), digital rectal examination (DRE), age, and prostate volume (AUC 0.753; sensitivity 96.2%, specificity 27.3%). Conclusion: AI-enhanced micro-US reduces false positives from conventional screening tools while preserving high sensitivity. It shows promise as a point-of-care alternative to MRI, integrating risk stratification and biopsy guidance into a single platform.
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.