ArticleRadiology2018
What Are We Missing? False-Negative Cancers at Multiparametric MR Imaging of the Prostate.
Article in Radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 114 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
114 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 251 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transperineal magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy versus transrectal route in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2024Pooled it
- Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Steering Committee: PI-RADS v2 Status Update and Future Directions.European urology · 2019Guideline
- [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Trial
- Biomarker vs MRI-Enhanced Strategies for Prostate Cancer Screening: The STHLM3-MRI Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Article
- Plasma Proteomic Profiling Was Used to Discover a Biochemical Recurrence Prediction Model for Prostate Cancer.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2026Article
- A Pilot Study ofThe Prostate · 2026Article
- Micro-ultrasound for prostate cancer.Nature reviews. Urology · 2026Review
- Non-invasive diagnosis strategy integrating PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI for patients with suspected prostate cancer: a multi-center study.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- Comparison between artificial intelligence-based and manual organ delineations in pretreatment computed tomography scans of prostate cancer patients: a visual grading study.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2026Article
- Cost Analysis of PSMA-PET in the PROSPET-BX Trial.Cancers · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Prostate MRI: Addressing Current Limitations Through Emerging Technologies.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2026Review
- External evaluation of an open-source deep learning model for prostate cancer detection on bi-parametric MRI.European radiology · 2026Article
- Avoiding unnecessary biopsy in suspicious prostate cancer using PRIMARY score ≤3 and PSAD ≤0.2 ng/mL/cm3: a real-world, dual-center study from China.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Lesion Stiffness Measured by Magnetic Resonance Elastography: A Novel Biomarker for Differentiating Benign, Premalignant and Malignant Prostate Lesions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Synthetic DWI: contrast improvement for diffusion-weighted imaging in prostate using T1 shine-through by synthesizing images with adjusted TR and TE.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- A novel MRI-based habitat analysis and deep learning for predicting perineural invasion in prostate cancer: a two-center study.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Detection Rates of Prostate Cancer Across Prostatic Zones Using Freehand Single-Access Transperineal Fusion Biopsies.Cancers · 2025Article
- Revolutionizing Prostate Cancer Detection: The Role of Approved PSMA-PET Imaging Agents.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
54 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose To characterize clinically important prostate cancers missed at multiparametric (MP) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. Materials and Methods The local institutional review board approved this HIPAA-compliant retrospective single-center study, which included 100 consecutive patients who had undergone MP MR imaging and subsequent radical prostatectomy. A genitourinary pathologist blinded to MP MR findings outlined prostate cancers on whole-mount pathology slices. Two readers correlated mapped lesions with reports of prospectively read MP MR images. Readers were blinded to histopathology results during prospective reading. At histopathologic examination, 80 clinically unimportant lesions (<5 mm; Gleason score, 3+3) were excluded. The same two readers, who were not blinded to histopathologic findings, retrospectively reviewed cancers missed at MP MR imaging and assigned a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 score to better understand false-negative lesion characteristics. Descriptive statistics were used to define patient characteristics, including age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, PSA density, race, digital rectal examination results, and biopsy results before MR imaging. Student t test was used to determine any demographic differences between patients with false-negative MP MR imaging findings and those with correct prospective identification of all lesions. Results Of the 162 lesions, 136 (84%) were correctly identified with MP MR imaging. Size of eight lesions was underestimated. Among the 26 (16%) lesions missed at MP MR imaging, Gleason score was 3+4 in 17 (65%), 4+3 in one (4%), 4+4 in seven (27%), and 4+5 in one (4%). Retrospective PI-RADS version 2 scores were assigned (PI-RADS 1, n = 8; PI-RADS 2, n = 7; PI-RADS 3, n = 6; and PI-RADS 4, n = 5). On a per-patient basis, MP MR imaging depicted clinically important prostate cancer in 99 of 100 patients. At least one clinically important tumor was missed in 26 (26%) patients, and lesion size was underestimated in eight (8%). Conclusion Clinically important lesions can be missed or their size can be underestimated at MP MR imaging. Of missed lesions, 58% were not seen or were characterized as benign findings at second-look analysis. Recognition of the limitations of MP MR imaging is important, and new approaches to reduce this false-negative rate are needed.
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.