Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26889125›Full record

ArticleCurrent urology2015

mp-MRI Prostate Characterised PIRADS 3 Lesions are Associated with a Low Risk of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer - A Retrospective Review of 92 Biopsied PIRADS 3 Lesions.

Heath Liddell, Rajeev Jyoti, Hodo Z Haxhimolla

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current urology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03615131 (Accuracy of Multi-parametric Prostate MRI and MRI-targeted, Ultrasound-navigated Prostate Fusion Biopsy in the Detection of Prostate Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 62 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed
9.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03615131 completednot on this map

Accuracy of Multi-parametric Prostate MRI and MRI-targeted, Ultrasound-navigated Prostate Fusion Biopsy in the Detection of Prostate Cancer:

TypeobservationalSponsorKantonsspital Winterthur KSWRan2015 to 2017Enrolled157ConditionsProstate CancerArmsMRI-TRUS fusion prostate biopsy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

62 citing papers in PubMed, 119 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Heath LiddellDepartment of Urology, The Canberra Hospital, Garran, Australia.
Rajeev JyotiUniversal Medical Imaging, Calvary Hospital, Bruce, Australia.
Hodo Z HaxhimollaDepartment of Urology, The Canberra Hospital, Garran, Australia; The Australian National University, Garran, Australia.
Canberra Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine whether prostate image reporting and data system (PIRADS) 3 lesions as assessed by a 3T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) represent clinically significant prostate cancer.

methodA retrospective review was performed on a series of consecutive patients who underwent MRI guided biopsy of the prostate for clinical suspicion of prostate cancer between January 2013 and March 2014. Demographic, clinical, MRI and biopsy data were reviewed and compared. The same 3T MRI without the use of an endo-rectal coil was employed to assess each patient, obtaining high resolution T2 weighted images, diffusion weighted imaging and dynamic contrast enhancement. The MRI data was sent to Dynacad software for analysis. A single experienced radiologist reported all the studies from this series using a modified PIRADS scoring system. Subsequently, all the lesions marked PIRADS 3 or above were targeted with 18G core biopsy using DynaTrim in-gantry MRI guidance system. Needle position targeting the lesion was recorded prior to each biopsy. All core biopsy samples were sent to one of two pathology laboratories where they were processed and reported as per the International Society of Urological Pathology protocols.

resultsOne hundred and eighteen patients comprising a total of 215 lesions were reviewed. Amongst this cohort, 92 PIRADS 3 lesions were identified and biopsied. The mean age of patients in this cohort was 62.6 years. Median prostate specific antigen (PSA) was 6.5 ng/ml and median prostate size was 78.4 ml. Eightysix (93.5%) of biopsied PIRADS 3 lesions were benign and 6 (6.5%) lesions were found to be malignant. Of these 6 malignant lesions, 4 (66%) were Gleason score 6 (3 + 3) and 2 (33%) were Gleason score 7 (3 + 4). Of the 86 non-malignant lesions, 1 (1.2%) represented high-grade prostate intraepithelial neoplasia and 2 (2.4%) represented atypical small acinar proliferation. PIRADS 3 lesions within the peripheral zone were more likely to be associated with malignant disease compared with lesions identified within the transition zone (10.8 vs. 3.8%). Those with malignant disease had a higher median PSA (8.1 vs. 6.4 ng/ml) and higher median PSA density (0.12 vs. 0.08) than those without malignant disease. Those with benign pathology had a higher prevalence of inflammation (31.4 vs. 16.7%). As per Epstein's criteria, 4 (4.3%) of the biopsied lesions represented clinically significant disease.

conclusionWe have demonstrated in our series, that prostate lesions characterized on a 3T multiparametric MRI examination of the prostate as PIRADS 3, according to the current prevalent scoring systems, are associated with a low likelihood of the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Image guided biopsyMagnetic resonance imagingProstate neoplasmsProstate risk assessment

Identifiers

PMID26889125
PMCPMC4748763
OpenAlexW1918088834

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.