Observational studyRadiology. Imaging cancer2026
Evaluating an AI-driven Triaging Workflow for MRI-based Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: A Simulation Study.
Observational study in Radiology. Imaging cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Autonomous AI in prostate cancer: the road ahead towards clinical implementation.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- Impact of central review and MRI image quality on prostate cancer diagnosis and biopsy decision-making in referred patients.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose To simulate an artificial intelligence (AI)-driven triaging workflow in which an AI system, using high-confidence thresholds, assesses a subset of prostate MRI examinations for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), compare the assessment with stand-alone radiologists, and evaluate the number of examinations triaged by the AI to estimate potential workload reduction. Materials and Methods Data from an international AI confirmatory study (February 2022-November 2023) were used in this retrospective study. MRI examinations of 500 men with suspected csPCa from four European centers were included. Exclusion criteria were prior prostate treatment, prior csPCa, or considerable imaging artifacts. AI-triaging thresholds were calibrated on 100 examinations. The AI system assessed examinations exceeding high-specificity or high-sensitivity thresholds, with the remaining examinations deferred to radiologists. The workflow was simulated on 400 examinations, including examinations from an external site, incorporating assessments from 62 radiologists. Reference standards were histopathology and/or 3 or more years of follow-up. Sensitivity and specificity of the triaging workflow were compared with the conventional workflow using multireader, multicase analysis of variance. Results Among the 400 patients (median age, 66 years; IQR, 60-69 years) included for testing, radiologists achieved a sensitivity of 89.4% (95% CI: 85.8, 93.1) and specificity of 57.7% (95% CI: 52.3, 63.1). The AI-driven pathway maintained comparable sensitivity (89.0%; 95% CI: 85.0, 93.0;
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.