ReviewTranslational andrology and urology2017
Cost consideration in utilization of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer.
Review in Translational andrology and urology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Polygenic risk scores for premagnetic resonance imaging risk stratification in men with clinically suspected prostate cancer.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Prostate Cancer Screening in Contemporary Era: PSA-Based Testing and Risk-Adapted Approaches.Cancers · 2026Review
- The 5-year results of the Stratified Cancer Active Surveillance programme for men with prostate cancer.BJU international · 2025Article
- Prostate cancer diagnostics: the independent and combined roles of SelectMDx and mpMRI.Central European journal of urology · 2025Article
- MRI as a screening tool for prostate cancer: current evidence and future challenges.World journal of urology · 2023Review
- A Review of PRESAGE Radiochromic Polymer and the Compositions for Application in Radiotherapy Dosimetry.Polymers · 2022Review
- A Head-to-head Comparison of Prostate Cancer Diagnostic Strategies Using the Stockholm3 Test, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Swedish National Guidelines: Results from a Prospective Population-based Screening Study.European urology open science · 2022Article
- The urologist's learning curve of "in-bore" magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy.BMC urology · 2021Article
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasound with dispersion analysis for the localization of prostate cancer: correlation with radical prostatectomy specimens.World journal of urology · 2020Article
- Observational
- Evolution of prostate MRI: from multiparametric standard to less-is-better and different-is better strategies.European radiology experimental · 2019Review
- A narrative review of biparametric MRI (bpMRI) implementation on screening, detection, and the overall accuracy for prostate cancer.Therapeutic advances in urologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The screening, evaluation and management of prostate cancer changed significantly in the last decade. The recommendations regarding prostate cancer screening continue to evolve with new revelations about existing data sets and longer followup of landmark trials. Robotics has gained the vast majority of the marketplace for surgically managed prostate cancer in rapid fashion. The need for intervention in low risk prostate cancer has been closely examined and more men are being expectantly managed than ever before. Amidst all these changes, prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has emerged as a disruptive technology. Through the use of dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion weighted series, prostate tumors that were previously not visible have become identifiable and quantifiable. The ability of MRI to improve staging and identification of clinically significant disease has resulted in increased utilization for different aspects of prostate cancer care. The best studied use is in men with a prior negative transrectal ultrasound guided (TRUS) prostate biopsy and the performance characteristics in this role match well with the clinical question raised. The role for MRI in initial biopsy, in pre-surgical planning before prostatectomy and in men on active surveillance is less well defined. A primary concern in the use of MRI is that of cost. MRI units are expensive, both in initial outlay and ongoing use. The availability of MRI varies widely between countries and even within regions of the same country. Different healthcare models have different approaches for allocating the use of expensive resources, including MRI, in times when they are scarce. Prostate MRI can be used at multiple points in the management algorithm of prostate cancer and each implies different cost concerns. In this review we present an overview of current research in cost and cost efficacy for the use of MRI in the management of prostate cancer. By examining what is known and highlighting areas of ongoing research we hope to provide the reader with a solid foundation for understanding these complex, ever-changing issues.
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.