Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30038388›Full record

ArticleProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2018

The natural history of prostate cancer on MRI: lessons from an active surveillance cohort.

Francesco Giganti, Caroline M Moore, Shonit Punwani, Clare Allen, Mark Emberton, Alex Kirkham

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The natural history of prostate cancer.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. All change in the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2020
    Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Francesco GigantiDepartment of Radiology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. f.giganti@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5218-6431
Caroline M MooreDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Shonit PunwaniDepartment of Radiology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Clare AllenDepartment of Radiology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Mark EmbertonDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Alex KirkhamDepartment of Radiology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity College Hospital · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 16463Cancer Research UK 20265
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMultiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is being used increasingly in the setting of active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer. We investigated changes in the mpMRI appearance of lesions on AS, to show the variability of volume measurements in visible lesions and assess change in lesion size according to grade.

methodsWe retrospectively retrieved 86 men on AS (NICE guidelines) with more than one mpMRI (the first before 2013). Two radiologists, in consensus, were blinded to patient demographics and date of scan. The scans were randomly reported to reduce any bias. For visible lesions, we measured volume by planimetry on the sequence best showing the most conspicuous (index) tumour and attributed a 5-point Likert score.

results43/86 men did not have a visible lesion on the initial mpMRI (≤2/5). Of these, 5/43 had developed a lesion scoring ≥3/5 at a median of 3.6 years of follow up. 40/86 had a lesion scoring ≥3/5 on two or more scans. There was a significant increase in volume over 3.6 years by a median of 10% (p < 0.01)-by a median of 6% for Gleason 3+3 and 18% for 3+4 (p = 0.058). Thirty-five men had a visible lesion on two scans separated by <2 years; of these, 21/35 showed a 78% median increase in tumour size between the two scans and 11/35 showed an apparent 25% median decrease in lesion size.

conclusionsA total of 17% of men with no visible lesion developed a visible lesion at a median follow up of 3.6 years. It is possible to show significant growth in patients with a visible lesion, but variability in volume measurements between scans means that it is difficult to reliably detect increases of this order. This variability may inform the design of mpMRI protocols in AS and the time between follow up scans.

Indexed as

AgedDisease ProgressionHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingNeoplasm StagingPopulation SurveillanceProstatic NeoplasmsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID30038388
OpenAlexW2883304976

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.