Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31596671›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of urology2020

Prostate Cancer Detection Rate of Freehand versus 3-Dimensional Template Mapping Biopsy Using a Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Device in Biopsy Naïve Men.

Steve R Zhou, Edward Chang, Aalhad Patankar, Jiaoti Huang, Leonard S Marks, Shyam Natarajan

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Steve R ZhouDavid Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, California.
Edward ChangDepartment of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Aalhad PatankarDepartment of Bioengineering, UCLA, Los Angeles, California.
Jiaoti HuangDepartment of Pathology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
Leonard S MarksDepartment of Urology, UCLA, Los Angeles, California.
Shyam NatarajanDepartment of Bioengineering, UCLA, Los Angeles, California.
University of California, Los Angeles · USDuke University · USLa Jolla Bioengineering Institute · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Focal Laser Ablation of Prostate Cancer using MR/US FusionR01CA218547 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI MARKS, LEONARD STEPHEN, NATARAJAN, SHYAM · 2017 to 2021
$3.1M
Biopsy Tracking and MRI Fusion to Enhance Imaging of Cancer Within the ProstateR01CA158627 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI MARKS, LEONARD STEPHEN · 2011 to 2013
$1.4M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA158627NCI NIH HHS R01 CA218547
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTargeted prostate biopsy devices include a 3-dimensional digital template grid to guide systematic biopsy locations. Following a template could better ensure uniform and well distributed sampling of the prostate compared to the traditional freehand biopsy approach, possibly decreasing the chance of false-negative biopsy. Thus, we determined cancer detection rates obtained by conventional freehand systematic sampling vs template mapping sampling using a magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion device. MATERIALS AND

methodsMen who underwent first line conventional or image guided prostate biopsy were identified retrospectively in an institutional review board approved protocol. Excluded from study were men with prior biopsy or treatment or fewer than 10 cores taken. Targeted cores obtained by image guided biopsy were censored from analysis to simulate systematic template biopsy. The resulting cancer detection rate was compared to that of conventional biopsy.

resultsWe identified 1,582 patients between 2006 and 2014 who met the criteria for analysis, including 1,052 who underwent conventional biopsy and 530 who underwent template biopsy with a magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion device. Patient age, prostate specific antigen and the number of systematic cores were the same in the 2 groups. Template biopsy detected any prostate cancer in 257 of 530 men (48.5%) and clinically significant cancer in 196 (37.0%) while conventional biopsy detected any cancer in 432 of 1,052 (41.0%) (p=0.005) and clinically significant cancer in 308 (29.2%) (p=0.002).

conclusionsTemplate mapping systematic biopsy detected more prostate cancer than conventional sampling in biopsy naïve men. It is a promising cost-effective alternative to magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy as an upfront screening tool.

Indexed as

AgedBiopsy, Large-Core NeedleCost-Benefit AnalysisFalse Negative ReactionsFeasibility StudiesHumansImage-Guided BiopsyImaging, Three-DimensionalKallikreinsMagnetic Resonance Imaging, InterventionalMaleMiddle AgedMultimodal ImagingProstateProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsKallikreinsKLK3 protein, humanProstate-Specific Antigendiagnosisimage guided biopsymagnetic resonance imagingprostatic neoplasmsultrasonography

Identifiers

PMID31596671
PMCPMC7384745
OpenAlexW2979665120

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.