Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29126575›Full record

ArticleCurrent problems in diagnostic radiology2018

Validation of Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Version 2: A Retrospective Analysis.

Michael Nguyentat, Alexander Ushinsky, Alessandra Miranda-Aguirre, Edward Uchio, Chandana Lall, Layla Shirkhoda, Thomas Lee, Christopher Green, Roozbeh Houshyar

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Current problems in diagnostic radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

9 authors.

Michael NguyentatDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine Medical Center, Orange, CA.
Alexander UshinskyDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine Medical Center, Orange, CA. Electronic address: AUshinsk@uci.edu.
Alessandra Miranda-AguirreDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine Medical Center, Orange, CA.
Edward UchioDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine Medical Center, Orange, CA.
Chandana LallDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine Medical Center, Orange, CA.
Layla ShirkhodaDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine Medical Center, Orange, CA.
Thomas LeeDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine Medical Center, Orange, CA.
Christopher GreenDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine Medical Center, Orange, CA.
Roozbeh HoushyarDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine Medical Center, Orange, CA.

Funding

University of California Health Participation in the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C)UL1TR001414 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI COOPER, DAN M, VILAIN, ERIC J. · 2015 to 2023
$35.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001414
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeUse of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsies to determine the accuracy of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI), using Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2), for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in the overall gland and specifically the peripheral zone (PZ) and transitional zone (TZ).

methodsA retrospective analysis of patients who underwent fusion biopsy identified 137 men with 231 prostate lesions was approved by the Institutional Review Board. Subjects initially classified under PI-RADSv1 criteria were regraded using PI-RADSv2 by a radiologist blinded to PI-RADSv1 score and biopsy results. Spearman correlation, chi-squared, and logistic regression analysis were performed.

resultsThere was positive correlation between PI-RADSv2 and Gleason scores (P < 0.001). In the PZ, mpMRI demonstrated 100% sensitivity, 100% negative predictive value, and 35.9% positive predictive value, compared to 100%, 100%, and 27.1%, respectively, for TZ lesions. When predicting clinically significant prostate cancer, the PI-RADSv2 area under the curve for TZ lesions was 0.844 (95% CI: 0.753-0.935, P < 0.001) and 0.769 (95% CI: 0.684-0.854, P < 0.001) for PZ lesions. Combining PI-RADSv2 with additional risk factors (body mass index, prostate-specific antigen density, digital rectal examination) improved the area under curve.

conclusionsPI-RADSv2 achieves excellent sensitivity and negative predictive value for both PZ and TZ lesions.

Indexed as

Image-Guided BiopsyMultimodal ImagingAdultAgedAged, 80 and overHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsProstatic NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID29126575
PMCPMC6193550

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.