ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2018
Prospective comparison of PI-RADS version 2 and qualitative in-house categorization system in detection of prostate cancer.
Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Impact of PI-RADS Category 3 lesions on the diagnostic accuracy of MRI for detecting prostate cancer and the prevalence of prostate cancer within each PI-RADS category: A systematic review and meta-analysis.The British journal of radiology · 2021Pooled it
- Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Steering Committee: PI-RADS v2 Status Update and Future Directions.European urology · 2019Guideline
- MRI-Targeted, Systematic, and Combined Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis.The New England journal of medicine · 2020Trial
- Multi-reader evaluation of the prostate imaging quality score system version 2 (PI-QUAL V2) and its clinical application.European radiology · 2025Article
- Targeted biopsy added to systematic biopsy improves cancer detection in prostate cancer screening.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2024Article
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Biopsy in Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer.The Journal of urology · 2022Article
- Why Does Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy Miss Clinically Significant Cancer?The Journal of urology · 2022Article
- The predictive value of the prostate health index vs. multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer diagnosis in prostate biopsy.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- Article
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted and Systematic Biopsy for Detection of Grade Progression in Patients on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.The Journal of urology · 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
- PI-RADS® Category as a Predictor of Progression to Unfavorable Risk Prostate Cancer in Men on Active Surveillance.The Journal of urology · 2020Article
- Prospective Evaluation ofAJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2020Article
- A Grading System for Extraprostatic Extension of Prostate Cancer That We Can All Agree Upon?Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2020Article
- PI-RADS Steering Committee: The PI-RADS Multiparametric MRI and MRI-directed Biopsy Pathway.Radiology · 2019Review
- Comparison of biparametric MRI to full multiparametric MRI for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2019Article
- Predicting Gleason Group Progression for Men on Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance: Role of a Negative Confirmatory Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy.The Journal of urology · 2019Article
- Added Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Clinical Nomograms for Predicting Adverse Pathology in Prostate Cancer.The Journal of urology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProstate Imaging-Reporting and Data System v. 2 (PI-RADSv2) provides standardized nomenclature for interpretation of prostate multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). Inclusion of additional features for categorization may provide benefit to stratification of disease. PURPOSE: To prospectively compare PI-RADSv2 to a qualitative in-house system for detecting prostate cancer on mpMRI. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. POPULATION: In all, 338 patients who underwent mpMRI May 2015-May 2016, with subsequent MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy. FIELD STRENGTH: 3T mpMRI (T ASSESSMENT: One genitourinary radiologist prospectively read mpMRIs using both in-house and PI-RADSv2 5-category systems. STATISTICAL TEST: In lesion-based analysis, overall and clinically significant (CS) tumor detection rates (TDR) were calculated for all PI-RADSv2 and in-house categories. The ability of each scoring system to detect cancer was assessed by area under receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC). Within each PI-RADSv2 category, lesions were further stratified by their in-house categories to determine if TDRs can be increased by combining features of both systems.
resultsIn 338 patients (median prostate-specific antigen [PSA] 6.5 [0.6-113.6] ng/mL; age 64 [44-84] years), 733 lesions were identified (47% tumor-positive). Predictive abilities of both systems were comparable for all (AUC 76-78%) and CS cancers (AUCs 79%). The in-house system had higher overall and CS TDRs than PI-RADSv2 for categories 3 and 4 (P < 0.01 for both), with the greatest difference between the scoring systems seen in lesions scored category 4 (CS TDRs: in-house 65%, PI-RADSv2 22.1%). For lesions categorized as PI-RADSv2 = 4, characterization of suspicious/indeterminate extraprostatic extension (EPE) and equivocal findings across all mpMRI sequences contributed to significantly different TDRs for both systems (TDR range 19-75%, P < 0.05). DATA
conclusionPI-RADSv2 behaves similarly to an existing validated system that relies on the number of sequences on which a lesion is seen. This prospective evaluation suggests that sequence positivity and suspicion of EPE can enhance PI-RADSv2 category 4 cancer detection. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 3 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:1326-1335.
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.