Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27305918›Full record

ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2016

Midline lesions of the prostate: role of MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy and implications in Gleason risk stratification.

Akhil Muthigi, Abhinav Sidana, Arvin K George, Michael Kongnyuy, Nabeel Shakir, Meet Kadakia, Mahir Maruf, Thomas P Frye, Francesca Mertan, Daniel Su and 5 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International urology and nephrology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
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

15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Akhil MuthigiUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, Building 10, Room 1-5940, 20892, Bethesda, MD, USA. akhil.muthigi@nih.gov.
Abhinav SidanaUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, Building 10, Room 1-5940, 20892, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Arvin K GeorgeUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, Building 10, Room 1-5940, 20892, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Michael KongnyuyUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, Building 10, Room 1-5940, 20892, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Nabeel ShakirUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, Building 10, Room 1-5940, 20892, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Meet KadakiaUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, Building 10, Room 1-5940, 20892, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Mahir MarufUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, Building 10, Room 1-5940, 20892, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Thomas P FryeUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, Building 10, Room 1-5940, 20892, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Francesca MertanMolecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Daniel SuUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, Building 10, Room 1-5940, 20892, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Maria J MerinoLaboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Peter L ChoykeMolecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Baris TurkbeyMolecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Bradford J WoodCenter for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute and Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Peter A PintoUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, Building 10, Room 1-5940, 20892, Bethesda, MD, USA.
National Institutes of Health · USNational Cancer Institute · US

Funding

Prostate SectionZIABC011081 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI PINTO, PETER · 2009 to 2025
$15.2M
Study of Hereditary Renal and Other Familial SyndromesZIABC010696 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI MERINO, MARIA · 2009 to 2025
$4.5M
Prostate Cancer ImagingZ01BC010655 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI CHOYKE, PETER L · 2005 to 2008
$2.1M
miRNA profiling of prostate cancer in young and older male patientsZIABC011406 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI MERINO, MARIA · 2011 to 2023
$1.8M
Prostate SectionZ01BC011081 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI PINTO, PETER · 2008 to 2008
$99k
Interventional OncologyZIACL040015 · CLC · CLINICAL CENTER · PI WOOD, BRADFORD · 2009 to 2025
$0k
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 BC010655Intramural NIH HHS Z01 BC011081Intramural NIH HHS ZIA BC010696
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMRI-TRUS fusion biopsy (FBx) has proven efficacy in targeting suspicious areas that are traditionally missed by systematic 12-core biopsy (SBx). Midline prostate lesions are undersampled during SBx, as traditional approaches aim laterally during TRUS biopsy. The aim of our study was to determine the utility of FBx for targeting midline lesions identified on multiparametric MRI (mpMRI).

methodsA review was performed of a prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing mpMRI followed by FBx and SBx from 2007 to 2015. Midline location was defined as any lesion crossing the midline on axial imaging and involving both prostatic lobes. Index lesion was defined as lesion with highest Gleason score on biopsy. Patient demographic, imaging, and histopathologic data were collected. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to determine independent predictors of having clinically significant (CS) cancer (Gleason ≥ 7) in midline lesions.

resultsOut of 1266 patients, we identified 202 suspicious midline lesions in 190 patients [median (IQR) age 63 (10) years; PSA 7.6 (6.6)]. Eighty-eight (46.3 %) patients had cancer detection on FBx of midline lesion. A midline target represented the index lesion of the prostate in 63/190 (33.2 %) patients. Risk category upgrading based on FBx of a midline lesion compared to SBx occurred in 45/190 patients (23.7 %). On multivariate analysis, higher PSA (p = .001), lower MRI-derived prostate volume (p < .001), and moderate-high or high suspicion on mpMRI (p = .014) predicted CS cancer in midline lesions.

conclusionsMRI-TRUS FBx facilitates sampling of midline lesions. Integration of mpMRI and FBx for targeting of midline lesions improves detection of CS prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingAgedEndoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle AspirationHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingPredictive Value of TestsProstateProstatic NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesFusion biopsyMidlineMultiparametric MRIProstate cancer

Identifiers

PMID27305918
PMCPMC7780236
OpenAlexW2442296166

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.