본문으로 건너뛰기
← 뒤로

Study of AI algorithms on mpMRI and PHI for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer.

1/5 보강
Urologic oncology 📖 저널 OA 16.9% 2022: 0/1 OA 2025: 2/46 OA 2026: 19/76 OA 2022~2026 2025 Vol.43(9) p. 527.e17-527.e24
Retraction 확인
출처

PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 2/4)

유사 논문
P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
131 patients analyzes age, PSA, PHI and pathology.
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
추출되지 않음
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
추출되지 않음
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
Four logistic regression models were fitted, with pathological findings as the dependent variable.

Luo Z, Li J, Wang K, Li S, Qian Y, Xie W

📝 환자 설명용 한 줄

[OBJECTIVE] To study the feasibility of multiple factors in improving the diagnostic accuracy of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).

🔬 핵심 임상 통계 (초록에서 자동 추출 — 원문 검증 권장)
  • p-value P ≤ 0.001
  • p-value P < 0.05
  • 95% CI 0.871-0.972

이 논문을 인용하기

↓ .bib ↓ .ris
APA Luo Z, Li J, et al. (2025). Study of AI algorithms on mpMRI and PHI for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer.. Urologic oncology, 43(9), 527.e17-527.e24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2025.05.007
MLA Luo Z, et al.. "Study of AI algorithms on mpMRI and PHI for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer.." Urologic oncology, vol. 43, no. 9, 2025, pp. 527.e17-527.e24.
PMID 40451702 ↗

Abstract

[OBJECTIVE] To study the feasibility of multiple factors in improving the diagnostic accuracy of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).

[METHODS] A retrospective study with 131 patients analyzes age, PSA, PHI and pathology. Patients with ISUP > 2 were classified as csPCa, and others are non-csPCa. The mpMRI images were processed by a homemade AI algorithm, obtaining positive or negative AI results. Four logistic regression models were fitted, with pathological findings as the dependent variable. The predicted probability of the patients was used to test the prediction efficacy of the models. The DeLong test was performed to compare differences in the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (AUCs) between the models.

[RESULTS] The study includes 131 patients: 62 were diagnosed with csPCa and 69 were non-csPCa. Statically significant differences were found in age, PSA, PIRADS score, AI results, and PHI values between the 2 groups (all P ≤ 0.001). The conventional model (R = 0.389), the AI model (R = 0.566), and the PHI model (R = 0.515) were compared to the full model (R = 0.626) with ANOVA and showed statistically significant differences (all P < 0.05). The AUC of the full model (0.921 [95% CI: 0.871-0.972]) was significantly higher than that of the conventional model (P = 0.001), AI model (P < 0.001), and PHI model (P = 0.014).

[CONCLUSION] Combining multiple factors such as age, PSA, PIRADS score and PHI, adding AI algorithm based on mpMRI, the diagnostic accuracy of csPCa can be improved.

🏷️ 키워드 / MeSH 📖 같은 키워드 OA만

같은 제1저자의 인용 많은 논문 (5)

🏷️ 같은 키워드 · 무료전문 — 이 논문 MeSH/keyword 기반