ArticleThe Journal of urology2017
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.
Abstract read
In one paragraph
Article in The Journal of urology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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
44 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inter- and intra-rater variability of MRI-based lesion size measurements in active surveillance for prostate cancer: a multicentre study.European radiology · 2026Article
- MRI characteristics predict risk of pathological upgrade in patients with ISUP grade group 1 prostate cancer.European radiology · 2025Article
- Association between beta-blocker atenolol use and prostate cancer upgrading in active surveillance.BJUI compass · 2024Article
- Abbreviated Versus Multiparametric Prostate MRI in Active Surveillance for Prostate-Cancer Patients: Comparison of Accuracy and Clinical Utility as a Decisional Tool.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Success of targeted transperineal biopsy in patients on surveillance for grade group 1 prostate cancer.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2022Article
- Precision intervention for prostate cancer: Re-evaluating who is at risk.Cancer letters · 2022Review
- Assessment of elastographic Q-analysis score combined with Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) based on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)/multi-parameter magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) fusion-guided biopsy in differentiating benign and malignant prostate.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2022Article
- The current role of MRI for guiding active surveillance in prostate cancer.Nature reviews. Urology · 2022Review
- MRI-derived PRECISE scores for predicting pathologically-confirmed radiological progression in prostate cancer patients on active surveillance.European radiology · 2021Article
- Changes in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using the Prostate Cancer Radiologic Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation Criteria to Detect Prostate Cancer Progression for Men on Active Surveillance.European urology oncology · 2021Article
- Role of multiparametric prostate MRI in the management of prostate cancer.World journal of urology · 2021Review
- Role of MRI for the detection of prostate cancer.World journal of urology · 2021Review
- Perspective: a critical assessment of PI-RADS 2.1.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2020Article
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Detection of High Grade Cancer in the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study.The Journal of urology · 2020Article
- Utilization of Multiparametric MRI of Prostate in Patients under Consideration for or Already in Active Surveillance: Correlation with Imaging Guided Target Biopsy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Role of Changes in Magnetic Resonance Imaging or Clinical Stage in Evaluation of Disease Progression for Men with Prostate Cancer on Active Surveillance.European urology · 2020Article
- Prostate Cancer Detection Rate of Freehand versus 3-Dimensional Template Mapping Biopsy Using a Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Device in Biopsy Naïve Men.The Journal of urology · 2020Article
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Confirmatory Biopsy for Initiating Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer.JAMA network open · 2019Article
- PCASTt/SPCG-17-a randomised trial of active surveillance in prostate cancer: rationale and design.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Four-year outcomes from a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based active surveillance programme: PSA dynamics and serial MRI scans allow omission of protocol biopsies.BJU international · 2019Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Thomas P FryeDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester (TPF), Rochester, New York; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AKG), Ann Arbor, Michigan; Urologic Oncology Branch (TPF, AKG, AK, MMa, MK, AM, HH, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Surgical Pathology (MMe), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Molecular Imaging Program (PLC, BT), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Interventional Oncology (BW, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Cancer Prevention (HLP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Urology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland.
Arvin K GeorgeDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester (TPF), Rochester, New York; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AKG), Ann Arbor, Michigan; Urologic Oncology Branch (TPF, AKG, AK, MMa, MK, AM, HH, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Surgical Pathology (MMe), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Molecular Imaging Program (PLC, BT), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Interventional Oncology (BW, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Cancer Prevention (HLP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Urology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland.
Amichai KilchevskyDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester (TPF), Rochester, New York; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AKG), Ann Arbor, Michigan; Urologic Oncology Branch (TPF, AKG, AK, MMa, MK, AM, HH, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Surgical Pathology (MMe), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Molecular Imaging Program (PLC, BT), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Interventional Oncology (BW, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Cancer Prevention (HLP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Urology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland.
Mahir MarufDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester (TPF), Rochester, New York; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AKG), Ann Arbor, Michigan; Urologic Oncology Branch (TPF, AKG, AK, MMa, MK, AM, HH, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Surgical Pathology (MMe), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Molecular Imaging Program (PLC, BT), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Interventional Oncology (BW, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Cancer Prevention (HLP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Urology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland.
M Minhaj SiddiquiDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester (TPF), Rochester, New York; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AKG), Ann Arbor, Michigan; Urologic Oncology Branch (TPF, AKG, AK, MMa, MK, AM, HH, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Surgical Pathology (MMe), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Molecular Imaging Program (PLC, BT), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Interventional Oncology (BW, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Cancer Prevention (HLP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Urology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland.
Michael KongnyuyDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester (TPF), Rochester, New York; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AKG), Ann Arbor, Michigan; Urologic Oncology Branch (TPF, AKG, AK, MMa, MK, AM, HH, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Surgical Pathology (MMe), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Molecular Imaging Program (PLC, BT), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Interventional Oncology (BW, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Cancer Prevention (HLP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Urology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland.
Akhil MuthigiDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester (TPF), Rochester, New York; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AKG), Ann Arbor, Michigan; Urologic Oncology Branch (TPF, AKG, AK, MMa, MK, AM, HH, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Surgical Pathology (MMe), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Molecular Imaging Program (PLC, BT), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Interventional Oncology (BW, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Cancer Prevention (HLP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Urology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland.
Hui HanDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester (TPF), Rochester, New York; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AKG), Ann Arbor, Michigan; Urologic Oncology Branch (TPF, AKG, AK, MMa, MK, AM, HH, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Surgical Pathology (MMe), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Molecular Imaging Program (PLC, BT), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Interventional Oncology (BW, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Cancer Prevention (HLP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Urology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland.
Howard L ParnesDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester (TPF), Rochester, New York; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AKG), Ann Arbor, Michigan; Urologic Oncology Branch (TPF, AKG, AK, MMa, MK, AM, HH, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Surgical Pathology (MMe), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Molecular Imaging Program (PLC, BT), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Interventional Oncology (BW, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Cancer Prevention (HLP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Urology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland.
Maria MerinoDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester (TPF), Rochester, New York; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AKG), Ann Arbor, Michigan; Urologic Oncology Branch (TPF, AKG, AK, MMa, MK, AM, HH, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Surgical Pathology (MMe), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Molecular Imaging Program (PLC, BT), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Interventional Oncology (BW, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Cancer Prevention (HLP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Urology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland.
Peter L ChoykeDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester (TPF), Rochester, New York; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AKG), Ann Arbor, Michigan; Urologic Oncology Branch (TPF, AKG, AK, MMa, MK, AM, HH, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Surgical Pathology (MMe), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Molecular Imaging Program (PLC, BT), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Interventional Oncology (BW, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Cancer Prevention (HLP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Urology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland.
Baris TurkbeyDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester (TPF), Rochester, New York; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AKG), Ann Arbor, Michigan; Urologic Oncology Branch (TPF, AKG, AK, MMa, MK, AM, HH, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Surgical Pathology (MMe), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Molecular Imaging Program (PLC, BT), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Interventional Oncology (BW, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Cancer Prevention (HLP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Urology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland.
Brad WoodDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester (TPF), Rochester, New York; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AKG), Ann Arbor, Michigan; Urologic Oncology Branch (TPF, AKG, AK, MMa, MK, AM, HH, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Surgical Pathology (MMe), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Molecular Imaging Program (PLC, BT), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Interventional Oncology (BW, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Cancer Prevention (HLP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Urology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland.
Peter A PintoDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester (TPF), Rochester, New York; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AKG), Ann Arbor, Michigan; Urologic Oncology Branch (TPF, AKG, AK, MMa, MK, AM, HH, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Surgical Pathology (MMe), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Molecular Imaging Program (PLC, BT), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Interventional Oncology (BW, PAP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Cancer Prevention (HLP), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Division of Urology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland. Electronic address: pintop@mail.nh.gov.
Funding
Center for Interventional OncologyZIDBC011242 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI WOOD, BRADFORD J · 2009 to 2025
$18.7MProstate SectionZIABC011081 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI PINTO, PETER · 2009 to 2025
$15.2MProstate SectionZ01BC011081 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI PINTO, PETER · 2008 to 2008
$99kInterventional OncologyZIACL040015 · CLC · CLINICAL CENTER · PI WOOD, BRADFORD · 2009 to 2025
$0kIntramural NIH HHS Z01 BC011081
Abstract
purposeActive surveillance is an established option for men with low risk prostate cancer. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging with magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion guided biopsy may better identify patients for active surveillance compared to systematic 12-core biopsy due to improved risk stratification. To our knowledge the performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in following men on active surveillance with visible lesions is unknown. We evaluated multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion guided biopsy to monitor men on active surveillance. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective review included men from 2007 to 2015 with prostate cancer on active surveillance in whom magnetic resonance imaging visible lesions were monitored by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and fusion guided biopsy. Progression was defined by ISUP (International Society of Urological Pathology) grade group 1 to 2 and ISUP grade group 2 to 3. Significance was considered at p ≤0.05.
resultsA total of 166 patients on active surveillance with 2 or more fusion guided biopsies were included in analysis. Mean followup was 25.5 months. Of the patients 29.5% had pathological progression. Targeted biopsy alone identified 44.9% of patients who progressed compared to 30.6% identified by systematic 12-core biopsy alone (p = 0.03). Fusion guided biopsy detected 26% more cases of pathological progression on surveillance biopsy compared to systematic 12-core biopsy. Progression on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging was the sole predictor of pathological progression at surveillance biopsy (p = 0.013). Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging progression in the entire cohort had 81% negative predictive value, 35% positive predictive value, 77.6% sensitivity and 40.5% specificity in detecting pathological progression.
conclusionsMultiparametric magnetic resonance imaging progression predicts the risk of pathological progression. Patients with stable multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging findings have a low rate of progression. Incorporating fusion guided biopsy in active surveillance nearly doubled our detection of pathological progression compared to systematic 12-core biopsy.
Indexed as
Image-Guided BiopsyMagnetic Resonance Imaging, InterventionalPopulation SurveillanceUltrasonography, InterventionalAgedDisease ProgressionHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsProstatic NeoplasmsRetrospective Studiesbiopsymagnetic resonance imagingprostatic neoplasmsultrasonographywatchful waiting
Identifiers
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.