Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42126787›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2026

MRI radiomics predicting cribriform growth informs active surveillance decision in intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Mar Fernandez Salamanca, Rita Simões, Malgorzata Deręgowska-Cylke, Eduardo Pais Pooch, Pim J van Leeuwen, Henk G van der Poel, Marcos A S Guimaraes, Uulke A van der Heide, Ivo G Schoots

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology experimental, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Mar Fernandez SalamancaDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.fernandez@nki.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8845-1794
Rita SimõesDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Malgorzata Deręgowska-CylkeDepartment of Radiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Żwirki i Wigury 61, 02-091, Warsaw, Poland.
Eduardo Pais PoochDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Pim J van LeeuwenDepartment of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Henk G van der PoelDepartment of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Marcos A S GuimaraesDepartment of Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Uulke A van der HeideDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ivo G SchootsDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. i.schoots@nki.nl.

Funding

KWF Kankerbestrijding 12975
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAccurate exclusion of cribriform growth (GP4Crib+), an adverse histologic feature in prostate cancer, remains a challenge in selecting intermediate-risk patients for active surveillance (AS). This study evaluates whether an MRI-based radiomics model predicting GP4Crib+ can support AS inclusion decisions under the assumption that intermediate-risk men without GP4Crib+ could be safely managed with AS. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis single-center retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board (IRBd21-108) and included men with Cambridge Prognostic Group (CPG) -1, CPG-2, or CPG-3 (Gleason grade (GG) 2) prostate cancer who underwent MRI and radical prostatectomy. In this cohort, a previously trained radiomics model was applied across the whole prostate to generate voxel-wise GP4Crib+ probability maps, to ultimately identify men with GP4Crib. This model was tested in two scenarios: (1) CPG-1+2, and (2) CPG-1+2+3(GG2) patients on biopsy. The reference scenario was CPG-1 men to AS (guideline recommendations).

resultsWe included 127 patients (median age 66 years, interquartile range 47‒78). Standalone radiomics performance was moderate (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC): 0.68 overall; 0.60 for CPG-2; and 0.70 for CPG-3(GG2)). At a 0.60 probability threshold, the model reduced overtreatment by 9% in CPG-1 + 2 men (with 1% increase in undertreatment). In CPG-1+2+3(GG2) men, the model reduced overtreatment by 8%, maintaining low undertreatment (3%). Most false negatives involved smaller than 1.5-mm cribriform foci.

conclusionOur MRI-based GP4Crib+ radiomics model is able to support AS decisions in men with CPG-1+2+3(GG2). Despite modest standalone diagnostic performance, its integration into the clinical work-up may help safely expand AS selection to intermediate-risk men, ultimately reducing overtreatment. RELEVANCE STATEMENT: MRI-based radiomics may support noninvasive exclusion of cribriform growth to guide active surveillance eligibility in intermediate-risk prostate cancer, enabling safer management decisions and reducing unnecessary treatment. KEY POINTS: Prostate cancer cribriform growth is difficult to detect but crucial for treatment decisions. MRI radiomics helps exclude cribriform growth in intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients. Radiomics-informed decisions reduced overtreatment under structured AS scenarios.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingProstatic NeoplasmsWatchful WaitingAgedHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingRadiomicsRetrospective StudiesActive surveillanceCribriform growthMagnetic resonance imagingProstate cancerRadiomics

Identifiers

PMID42126787
PMCPMC13172117

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.