Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30461076›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association2019

Detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer in magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography-fusion transperineal targeted biopsy for lesions with a prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 score of 3-5.

Yuji Hakozaki, Hisashi Matsushima, Taro Murata, Tomoko Masuda, Yoko Hirai, Mai Oda, Nobuo Kawauchi, Munehiro Yokoyama, Haruki Kume

Open access · hybridAbstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. MR Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion-Guided Biopsy and Primary Focal Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yuji HakozakiDepartment of Urology, Tokyo Metropolitan Police Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Hisashi MatsushimaDepartment of Urology, Tokyo Metropolitan Police Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Taro MurataDepartment of Urology, Tokyo Metropolitan Police Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Tomoko MasudaDepartment of Urology, Tokyo Metropolitan Police Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Yoko HiraiDepartment of Urology, Tokyo Metropolitan Police Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Mai OdaDepartment of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Police Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Nobuo KawauchiDepartment of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Police Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Munehiro YokoyamaDepartment of Pathology, Tokyo Metropolitan Police Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Haruki KumeDepartment of Urology, The University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Tokyo Metropolitan Police Hospital · JPThe University of Tokyo · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer classified according to the prostate imaging reporting and data system scoring system using magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound rigid fusion targeted biopsy.

methodsA total of 339 patients underwent transperineal magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound rigid fusion targeted biopsy in our institution between January 2015 and July 2017. Patients with prostate imaging reporting and data system category 1 or 2 and those with a pre-biopsy prostate-specific antigen value of >30 ng/mL were excluded from this study. Finally, 310 patients were recruited.

resultsThe detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer with prostate imaging reporting and data system category 3, 4, and 5 were 1.0% (1/98), 35.1% (47/134) and 73.1% (57/78), respectively. The factors affecting the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer with prostate imaging reporting and data system categories 4 and 5 were: (i) prostate imaging reporting and data system category 5; (ii) prostate volume <40 cc; (iii) no previous biopsy; (iv) lesion located in the peripheral zone; and (v) prostate-specific antigen density >0.35 ng/mL/mL.

conclusionsThe detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer on magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound rigid fusion targeted biopsy is very low in patients with prostate imaging reporting and data system category 3; therefore, patients with this classification should not undergo targeted biopsy. Prostate-specific antigen density, prostate volume, locations of suspected cancer and history of biopsy should be considered to predict the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer with prostate imaging reporting and data system categories 4 and 5.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overBiopsy, Large-Core NeedleHumansImage-Guided BiopsyImage Processing, Computer-AssistedJapanMagnetic Resonance Imaging, InterventionalMaleMiddle AgedProstateProstatic NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesUltrasonography, Interventionalclinically significant prostate cancermagnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsymultiparametric magnetic resonance imagingprostate biopsyprostate imaging reporting and data system version 2

Identifiers

PMID30461076
PMCPMC7379286
OpenAlexW2901782102

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.