ArticleHuman genomics2026
Enhancing prostate cancer diagnosis: a machine learning-based biomarker approach.
Article in Human genomics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe lack of reliable screening biomarkers for prostate cancer (PC) diagnosis makes tissue biopsy the gold-standard strategy. However, its frequent inconclusive results often lead to repeated procedures, increasing patient burden and healthcare costs. In this context, machine learning (ML) presents a novel approach for identifying gene signatures associated with tumor presence, offering a promising avenue for improved PC detection. Therefore, the present study explored the diagnostic potential of an ML-based gene signature and its applicability in tissue and plasma samples.
methodsThis study evaluated the clinical applicability of an ML-based algorithm developed using TCGA data (n = 608) and tested in an independent dataset (n = 349). The eleven candidate genes that contributed most to the predictive model were initially profiled by targeted RNA-Seq in prostate tissue validation cohort (n = 141) and further validated in replication tissue (n = 75) and plasma (n = 50) cohorts by qPCR and dPCR, respectively.
resultsGene expression analysis in prostate tissue led to the identification of a six-gene signature (DLX1, TDRD1, AMACR, HPN, HOXC6, and OR51E2) with high diagnostic performance (AUC = 95.9%). Expression patterns supported the gene signature’s potential to identify false-negative cases and correctly classify inconclusive biopsy results. In plasma, AMACR demonstrated added diagnostic value as a non-invasive biomarker when integrated with clinical parameters (AUC = 93.21%).
conclusionsThese findings demonstrate that our ML-based gene signature can accurately distinguish PC from non-tumoral tissue and resolve ambiguous biopsy results. Its integration alongside histopathology has the potential to reduce diagnostic uncertainty, improving PC early detection and guiding clinical decision-making.
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.