ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2020
A comparison between
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Head-to-head comparison of prostate-specific membrane antigen PET and multiparametric MRI in the diagnosis of pretreatment patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis.European radiology · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Head-to-Head Comparison ofFrontiers in oncology · 2021Pooled it
- The relevance of nomograms for prediction of pelvic lymph node metastases in the prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-PET/CT era.Current urology · 2025Article
- Very Low Prostate PET/CT PSMA Uptake May Be Misleading in Staging Radical Prostatectomy Candidates.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Comparison ofEuropean urology open science · 2021Review
- Diagnostic accuracy ofScience progressArticle
- Preoperative evaluation of prostate cancer byRadiologia brasileiraArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the ability of MATERIALS AND
methodsA multicenter cohort of patients who underwent PSMA PET/CT and pelvic mpMRI prior to RP with pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) was analyzed. Increased Ga68-PSMA uptake on PET/CT and enlarged (> 10 mm) or abnormal lymph nodes on mpMRI were considered positive findings. The final surgical pathology served as the standard of reference. The negative predictive value (NPV) was calculated for each modality separately, as well as the combined value.
resultsIncluded were 89 patients with D'Amico intermediate (45%) or high-risk (55%) prostate cancer. The median number of extracted LN was 9 (IQR 6-14). LNI was found in 12 (13.5%) patients. The NPV of mpMRI, PSMA PET/CT, and the two tests combined were 87%, 89%, and 90%, in the entire cohort, 95%, 97%, and 97% in patients with intermediate-risk disease, and 80%, 82%, and 83% in patients with high-risk disease, respectively. The median diameter of LN missed by both imaging and the median intranodal tumor diameter was 5.5 (IQR 3-10) mm and 1 (IQR 1-3) mm, respectively.
conclusionsPSMA PET/CT and mpMRI demonstrated similar performance in excluding pelvic LNI with NPV of approximately 90%. The combination of both tests does not improve NPV significantly. Therefore, even in the era of advanced imaging, PLND is still recommended for accurate staging, especially in the high-risk population.
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.