ArticleInsights into imaging2026
Precise zonal diagnosis: multi-b-value DWI model reveals differential predictors of clinically significant prostate cancer in peripheral and transition zones.
Article in Insights into imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the diagnostic performance of multi-b-value DWI models for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), identify zone-specific predictors in the peripheral (PZ) and transition zones (TZ), and validate the model's robustness across different MRI vendors. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study enrolled 238 patients, comprising a primary cohort (n = 162) and an independent cross-vendor validation cohort (n = 76). Seven diffusion models (mono-exponential model (MEM), intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM), diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI), stretched-exponential model (SEM), fractional order calculus (FROC), continuous-time random walk (CTRW), and IVIM-DKI model) were fitted to generate 18 parameters. LASSO regression and generalized estimating equations (GEE) identified independent predictors. Model performance was assessed using ROC curves and decision curve analysis (DCA). Subgroup analyses were performed in PZ/TZ.
resultsMEM_ADC and CTRW_alpha were identified as robust independent predictors of csPCa. In the test set of the primary cohort, the Clinical+Multib_DWI model achieved an AUC of 0.85. Although the improvement over the Clinical+ADC model (AUC = 0.80) was not statistically significant (p > 0.05), the multi-b-value model demonstrated superior clinical net benefit. Crucially, in the cross-vendor validation cohort, the model maintained robust diagnostic accuracy (AUC = 0.88). Subgroup analysis revealed that CTRW_alpha exhibited strong diagnostic value for TZ lesions (AUC = 0.86) and TZ PI-RADS 3 lesions (AUC = 0.82).
conclusionMEM_ADC and CTRW_alpha are zone-specific predictors of csPCa. While the multi-b-value model did not significantly outperform the ADC model in AUC, it offered superior clinical utility through higher net benefit and demonstrated cross-vendor robustness, supporting the translational potential of advanced diffusion models. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This study identifies zone-specific diffusion predictors for prostate cancer. By demonstrating robustness across different MRI vendors, the findings demonstrate that advanced diffusion models can be successfully translated from specialized protocols to clinical settings, providing superior decision-making utility regarding biopsy necessity. KEY POINTS: Advanced diffusion models lack cross-vendor validation for prostate cancer diagnosis. Selected diffusion parameters demonstrated robust cancer prediction across independent scanner vendors. Zone-specific evaluation offers superior clinical benefit for personalized biopsy decisions.
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.