ArticleRadiology2017
Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: Short Dual-Pulse Sequence versus Standard Multiparametric MR Imaging-A Multireader Study.
Article in Radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Head-to-head comparison of diagnostic test accuracy between biparametric and multiparametric MRI: an updated systematic review and bivariate meta-analysis.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of biparametric prostate MRI for prostate cancer in men at risk.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2021Pooled it
- Diagnostic Ability of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer and Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Equivocal Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Pooled it
- A Report on the Use of Biparametric MRI in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: A Two-Year Single Centre Experience.Cureus · 2025Article
- Deep Learning-based Unsupervised Domain Adaptation via a Unified Model for Prostate Lesion Detection Using Multisite Biparametric MRI Datasets.Radiology. Artificial intelligence · 2024Article
- Machine learning based prediction of image quality in prostate MRI using rapid localizer images.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2024Article
- Prostate volume analysis in image registration for prostate cancer care: a verification study.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2023Article
- Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Study in the mpMRI of the Prostate-Unnecessary or Underutilised? A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Multi-parametric MRI for radiotherapy simulation.Medical physics · 2023Review
- Landmarks in the evolution of prostate biopsy.Nature reviews. Urology · 2023Review
- 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
- Comparison between biparametric and multiparametric MRI in predicting muscle invasion by bladder cancer based on the VI-RADS.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Article
- Current Status of Biparametric MRI in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Literature Analysis.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Abbreviated MR Protocols in Prostate MRI.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Abbreviated Bi-Parametric MRI (a-bpMRI) for Prostate Cancer Detection and Screening: A Multi-Reader Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Radiomic Machine Learning and External Validation Based on 3.0 T mpMRI for Prediction of Intraductal Carcinoma of Prostate With Different Proportion.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Improving workflow in prostate MRI: AI-based decision-making on biparametric or multiparametric MRI.Insights into imaging · 2021Article
- Comparison of Sensitivity and Specificity of Biparametric versus Multiparametric Prostate MRI in the Detection of Prostate Cancer in 431 Men with Elevated Prostate-Specific Antigen Levels.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging Based Radiomic Models of Prostate Cancer: A Narrative Review.Cancers · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose To compare the diagnostic performance of a short dual-pulse sequence magnetic resonance (MR) imaging protocol versus a standard six-pulse sequence multiparametric MR imaging protocol for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Materials and Methods This HIPAA-compliant study was approved by the regional ethics committee. Between July 2013 and March 2015, 63 patients from a prospectively accrued study population who underwent MR imaging of the prostate including transverse T1-weighted; transverse, coronal, and sagittal T2-weighted; diffusion-weighted; and dynamic contrast material-enhanced MR imaging with a 3-T imager at a single institution were included in this retrospective study. The short MR imaging protocol image set consisted of transverse T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted images only. The standard MR imaging protocol image set contained images from all six pulse sequences. Three expert readers from different institutions assessed the likelihood of prostate cancer on a five-point scale. Diagnostic performance on a quadrant basis was assessed by using areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves, and differences were evaluated by using 83.8% confidence intervals. Intra- and interreader agreement was assessed by using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Transperineal template saturation biopsy served as the standard of reference. Results At histopathologic evaluation, 84 of 252 (33%) quadrants were positive for cancer in 38 of 63 (60%) men. There was no significant difference in detection of tumors larger than or equal to 0.5 mL for any of the readers of the short MR imaging protocol, with areas under the curve in the range of 0.74-0.81 (83.8% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64, 0.89), and for readers of the standard MR imaging protocol, areas under the curve were 0.71-0.77 (83.8% CI: 0.62, 0.86). Ranges for sensitivity were 0.76-0.95 (95% CI: 0.53, 0.99) and 0.76-0.86 (95% CI: 0.53, 0.97) and those for specificity were 0.84-0.90 (95% CI: 0.79, 0.94) and 0.82-0.90 (95% CI: 0.77, 0.94) for the short and standard MR protocols, respectively. Ranges for interreader agreement were 0.48-0.60 (83.8% CI: 0.41, 0.66) and 0.49-0.63 (83.8% CI: 0.42, 0.68) for the short and standard MR imaging protocols. Conclusion For the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, no difference was found in the diagnostic performance of the short MR imaging protocol consisting of only transverse T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted imaging pulse sequences compared with that of a standard multiparametric MR imaging protocol.
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.