ArticleBritish journal of cancer2014
Identification of pathologically insignificant prostate cancer is not accurate in unscreened men.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03982706 (Examination of Focal Therapies - MRI-Fusion, HIFU, NanoKnife and Cryotherapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 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.
Examination of Focal Therapies - MRI-Fusion, HIFU, NanoKnife and Cryotherapy
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed.
- Active monitoring, radical prostatectomy and radical radiotherapy in PSA-detected clinically localised prostate cancer: the ProtecT three-arm RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Trial
- The concordance between the volume hotspot and the grade hotspot: a 3-D reconstructive model using the pathology outputs from the PROMIS trial.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2016Trial
- Is MRI/US-guided fusion biopsy ready to replace systematic biopsy in detecting clinically significant prostate carcinoma? - a retrospective study.BMC urology · 2026Article
- Combination of MRI prostate and 18F-DCFPyl PSMA PET/CT detects all clinically significant prostate cancers in treatment-naive patients: An international multicentre retrospective study.Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology · 2022Article
- The predictive value of the prostate health index vs. multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer diagnosis in prostate biopsy.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- Circulating miRNAs as Potential Biomarkers in Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Radiotherapy.Cancer management and research · 2021Article
- Prostate Imaging Compared to Transperineal Ultrasound-guided biopsy for significant prostate cancer Risk Evaluation (PICTURE): a prospective cohort validating study assessing Prostate HistoScanning.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2019Article
- Development and validation of a novel risk score for the detection of insignificant prostate cancer in unscreened patient cohorts.British journal of cancer · 2018Article
- Patient experience after transperineal template prostate biopsy compared to prior transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy.Central European journal of urology · 2018Article
- Accuracy of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.Oncotarget · 2017Article
- The PICTURE study: diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric MRI in men requiring a repeat prostate biopsy.British journal of cancer · 2017Article
- Does true Gleason pattern 3 merit its cancer descriptor?Nature reviews. Urology · 2016Review
- Optimizing safety and accuracy of prostate biopsy.Current opinion in urology · 2016Review
- Further reduction of disqualification rates by additional MRI-targeted biopsy with transperineal saturation biopsy compared with standard 12-core systematic biopsies for the selection of prostate cancer patients for active surveillance.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2016Article
- [Multiparametric MRI and MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy in patients with prior negative prostate biopsy].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2016Article
- [Value of MRI/ultrasound fusion in primary biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2016Article
- The challenging landscape of medical device approval in localized prostate cancer.Nature reviews. Urology · 2016Review
- Epidermal growth factor receptor immunohistochemistry: new opportunities in metastatic colorectal cancer.Journal of translational medicine · 2015Review
- The current and future role of magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer detection and management.Translational andrology and urology · 2015Review
- A urine-based methylation signature for risk stratification within low-risk prostate cancer.British journal of cancer · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIdentification of men harbouring insignificant prostate cancer (PC) is important in selecting patients for active surveillance. Tools have been developed in PSA-screened populations to identify such men based on clinical and biopsy parameters.
methodsProspectively collected case series of 848 patients was treated with radical prostatectomy between July 2007 and October 2011 at an English tertiary care centre. Tumour volume was assessed by pathological examination. For each tool, receiver operator characteristics were calculated for predicting insignificant disease by three different criteria and the area under each curve compared. Comparison of accuracy in screened and unscreened populations was performed.
resultsOf 848 patients, 415 had Gleason 3+3 disease on biopsy. Of these, 32.0% had extra-prostatic extension and 50.2% were upgraded. One had positive lymph nodes. Two hundred and six (24% of cohort) were D'Amico low risk. Of these, 143 had more than two biopsy cores involved. None of the tools evaluated has adequate discriminative power in predicting insignificant tumour burden. Accuracy is low in PSA-screened and -unscreened populations.
conclusionsIn our unscreened population, tools designed to identify insignificant PC are inaccurate. Detection of a wider size range of prostate tumours in the unscreened may contribute to relative inaccuracy.
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.