ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2019
Clinical significance of the De Ritis ratio for detecting prostate cancer in a repeat prostate biopsy.
Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: We evaluated factors predicting a positive repeat biopsy result in patients with an initial negative prostate biopsy result. Materials and Methods: This study included 124 patients in whom prostate cancer (PCa) was not detected in the initial transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy and who underwent repeat biopsy from January 2011 to December 2017. Patients without PCa in both initial and repeat prostate biopsies were designated as group 1 (n=82), and those in whom PCa was detected on a repeat prostate biopsy were designated as group 2 (n=42). Among group 2 patients, 6 had insignificant PCa according to the Epstein criteria and were combined with group 1 patients to make up group A (n=88). Patients with significant PCa were categorized as group B (n=36). We compared clinicopathologic characteristics between the groups. Results: Multivariate analysis showed that age (p=0.018) and detection of atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP) or ≥3 cores of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) (p=0.011) on the initial biopsy were predictive factors for a positive result on a repeat biopsy. When we compared group A and group B, age (p=0.004) and the De Ritis ratio (p=0.024) were significantly higher in group B in the multivariate analysis. Conclusions: Age and the detection of ASAP or ≥3 cores of HGPIN on the initial biopsy were associated with detection of PCa on a repeat biopsy. Age and the De Ritis ratio were found to be predictive factors for the detection of clinically significant PCa on a repeat biopsy.
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.