Trial reportBJU international2015
Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound (MRI-US) fusion-guided prostate biopsies obtained from axial and sagittal approaches.
Trial report in BJU international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- Should Hypoechoic Lesions on Transrectal Ultrasound Be Sampled During Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy?Urology · 2017Trial
- Reproducibility of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Fusion Guided Prostate Biopsy: Multi-Institutional External Validation by a Propensity Score Matched Cohort.The Journal of urology · 2016Trial
- Transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy versus combined magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion and systematic biopsy for prostate cancer detection in routine clinical practice.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2020Article
- Intra- and interreader reproducibility of PI-RADSv2: A multireader study.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2019Article
- How Would MRI-targeted Prostate Biopsy Alter Radiation Therapy Approaches in Treating Prostate Cancer?Urology · 2018Article
- Imaging as a Personalized Biomarker for Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
- Added Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Clinical Nomograms for Predicting Adverse Pathology in Prostate Cancer.The Journal of urology · 2018Article
- Targets missed: predictors of MRI-targeted biopsy failing to accurately localize prostate cancer found on systematic biopsy.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2018Article
- A Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Prediction Model for Prostate Biopsy Risk Stratification.JAMA oncology · 2018Article
- Prostate cancer management choices in patients undergoing multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy compared to systematic biopsy.Urologic oncology · 2018Article
- Article
- Multifunctional nanoparticles for real-time evaluation of toxicity during fetal development.PloS one · 2018Article
- Co-registration of MRI and ultrasound: accuracy of targeting based on radiology-pathology correlation.Translational andrology and urology · 2017Review
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Fusion Biopsy to Detect Progression in Patients with Existing Lesions on Active Surveillance for Low and Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer.The Journal of urology · 2017Article
- MR/US Fusion Technology: What Makes It Tick?Current urology reports · 2017Review
- Customized Tool for the Validation of Optical Coherence Tomography in Differentiation of Prostate Cancer.Technology in cancer research & treatment · 2017Article
- Missing the Mark: Prostate Cancer Upgrading by Systematic Biopsy over Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy.The Journal of urology · 2017Article
- The addition of a sagittal image fusion improves the prostate cancer detection in a sensor-based MRI /ultrasound fusion guided targeted biopsy.BMC urology · 2017Article
- Midline lesions of the prostate: role of MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy and implications in Gleason risk stratification.International urology and nephrology · 2016Article
- Prostate Cancer Diagnosis on Repeat Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy of Benign Lesions: Recommendations for Repeat Sampling.The Journal of urology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare cancer detection rates and concordance between magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound (MRI-US) fusion-guided prostate biopsy cores obtained from axial and sagittal approaches. PATIENTS AND
methodsInstitutional records of MRI-US fusion-guided biopsy were reviewed. Detection rates for all cancers, Gleason ≥3 + 4 cancers, and Gleason ≥4 + 3 cancers were computed. Agreement between axial and sagittal cores for cancer detection, and frequency where one was upgraded the other was computed on a per-target and per-patient basis.
resultsIn all, 893 encounters from 791 patients that underwent MRI-US fusion-guided biopsy in 2007-2013 were reviewed, yielding 4688 biopsy cores from 2344 targets for analysis. The mean age and PSA level at each encounter was 61.8 years and 9.7 ng/mL (median 6.45 ng/mL). Detection rates for all cancers, ≥3 + 4 cancers, and ≥4 + 3 cancers were 25.9%, 17.2%, and 8.1% for axial cores, and 26.1%, 17.6%, and 8.6% for sagittal cores. Per-target agreement was 88.6%, 93.0%, and 96.5%, respectively. On a per-target basis, the rates at which one core upgraded or detected a cancer missed on the other were 8.3% and 8.6% for axial and sagittal cores, respectively. Even with the inclusion of systematic biopsies, omission of axial or sagittal cores would have resulted in missed detection or under-characterisation of cancer in 4.7% or 5.2% of patients, respectively.
conclusionCancer detection rates, Gleason scores, and core involvement from axial and sagittal cores are similar, but significant cancer may be missed if only one core is obtained for each target. Discordance between axial and sagittal cores is greatest in intermediate-risk scenarios, where obtaining multiple cores may improve tissue characterisation.
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.