MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403610482 · doi:10.3390/cancers16203490

Advanced Imaging for Localized Prostate Cancer

2024· review· en· W4403610482 on OpenAlexafffund
Patrick Albers, Adam Kinnaird

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity Hospital FoundationAlberta Cancer Foundation
KeywordsProstate cancerMedicineProstateRadiologyCancerMedical physicsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Prostate cancer is a prevalent malignancy often presenting without early symptoms. Advanced imaging technologies have revolutionized its diagnosis and management. This review discusses the principles, benefits, and clinical applications of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), micro-ultrasound (microUS), and prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PSMA PET/CT) in localized prostate cancer. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature review of recent studies and guidelines on mpMRI, microUS, and PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer diagnosis, focusing on their applications in biopsy-naïve patients, those with previous negative biopsies, and patients under active surveillance. RESULTS: MpMRI has demonstrated high sensitivity and negative predictive value in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). MicroUS, a newer technology, has shown promising results in early studies, with sensitivity and specificity comparable to mpMRI. PSMA PET/CT has emerged as a highly sensitive and specific imaging modality, particularly valuable for staging and detecting metastatic disease. All three technologies have been incorporated into urologic practice for prostate cancer diagnosis and management, with each offering unique advantages in different clinical scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced imaging techniques, including mpMRI, microUS, and PSMA PET/CT, have significantly improved the accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis, staging, and management. These technologies enable more precise targeting of suspicious lesions during biopsy and therapy planning. However, further research, especially randomized controlled trials, is needed to fully establish the optimal use and inclusion of these imaging modalities in various stages of prostate cancer care.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.358 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207