ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2014
Endorectal MRI and MR spectroscopic imaging of prostate cancer: developing selection criteria for MR-guided focal therapy.
Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness with Hyperpolarized Dual-Agent 3D Dynamic Imaging of Metabolism and Perfusion.Cancer research · 2017Article
- Multimodal Imaging in Focal Therapy Planning and Assessment in Primary Prostate Cancer.Clinical and translational imaging · 2017Article
- Role of endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging in defining treatable intraprostatic tumor foci in prostate cancer: quantitative analysis of imaging contour compared to whole-mount histopathology.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo investigate criteria that can identify dominant treatable prostate cancer foci with high certainty at endorectal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MR spectroscopic (MRS) imaging, and thus facilitate selection of patients who are radiological candidates for MR-guided focal therapy. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively identified 88 patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer who underwent endorectal MRI and MRS imaging prior to radical prostatectomy with creation of histopathological tumor maps. Two independent readers noted the largest tumor foci at MRI, if visible, and the volume of concordant abnormal tissue at MRS imaging, if present. A logistic random intercept model was used to determine the association between clinical and MR findings and correct identification of treatable (over 0.5 cm3) dominant intraprostatic tumor foci.
resultsReaders 1 and 2 identified dominant tumor foci in 50 (57%) and 58 (65%) of 88 patients; 42 (84%) and 48 (83%) of these were dominant treatable lesions at histopathology, respectively. Within the statistical model, the volume of concordant spectroscopic abnormality was the only factor that predicted correct identification of a dominant treatable lesion on T2-weighted images (odds ratio=1.75; 95% confidence interval=1.08 to 2.82; P value=0.02). In particular, all visible lesions on T2-weighted imaging associated with at least 0.54 cm3 of concordant spectroscopic abnormality were correctly identified dominant treatable tumor foci.
conclusionPatients with dominant intraprostatic tumor foci seen on T2-weighted MRI and associated with at least 0.54 cm3 of concordant MRS imaging abnormality may be radiological candidates for MR-guided focal therapy.
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.