Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32705477›Full record

ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2020

Evaluating the efficacy of a low-cost cognitive MRI-targeted prostate biopsy protocol: is there still a role for lower volume centers in the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 era?

Yuta Takeshima, Yoshinori Tanaka, Kotaro Takemura, Shusaku Nakazono, Eiko Yamashita, Haruki Kume

Abstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International urology and nephrology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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.

Yuta TakeshimaDivision of Innovative Cancer Therapy, The Advanced Clinical Research Center, Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, 4-6-1 Shirokanedai, Minato-Ku, Tokyo, 108-8639, Japan. takeshima.yuta@mail.u-tokyo.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1195-6484
Yoshinori TanakaDepartment of Urology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, 1-26-1 Kyonan-cho, Musashino, Tokyo, 180-8610, Japan.
Kotaro TakemuraDepartment of Urology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, 1-26-1 Kyonan-cho, Musashino, Tokyo, 180-8610, Japan.
Shusaku NakazonoDepartment of Urology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, 1-26-1 Kyonan-cho, Musashino, Tokyo, 180-8610, Japan.
Eiko YamashitaDepartment of Radiology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, 1-26-1 Kyonan-cho, Musashino, Tokyo, 180-8610, Japan.
Haruki KumeDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan.
Musashino Red Cross Hospital · JPThe University of Tokyo · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMRI-targeted biopsy has improved prostate biopsy yield. However, cost constraints have made it difficult for many institutions to implement the newer methods. We evaluated the performance of a low-cost cognitive-targeting biopsy protocol based on 1.5 T multiparametric MRI graded with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 to examine the role for these institutions moving forward.

methodsRetrospective analysis of 251 consecutive patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) under 50 who underwent MRI and subsequent prostate biopsy at a single facility. In addition to systematic biopsy, targeted cores were obtained with cognitive recognition under ultrasound. A control group of 267 consecutive patients with PSA under 50 biopsied without prior MRI was analyzed.

resultsProstate biopsy preceded by MRI had a significantly higher probability of detecting both prostate cancer (68.1% vs. 51.3%) and clinically significant prostate cancer (57.4% vs. 39.7%) (p values < 0.01). Combination of systematic and targeted biopsy outperformed either regimen alone. PSA density and PI-RADS score were identified as independent risk factors, and a proposed diagnostic model (PSA density ≥ 0.25 or PI-RADS score ≥ 4) showed sensitivity of 88.6%, specificity of 55%, PPV of 81.2%, NPV of 68.8%, and accuracy of 78.0%.

conclusionsBoth pre-biopsy MRI and cognitive-targeted biopsy contributed to improvement of cancer yield. Future alterations of possible benefit included increasing target cores per lesion, and combining PI-RADS score and PSA density as indicators for biopsy. Similar protocols may represent an on-going role for lower volume centers in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Image-Guided BiopsyMultiparametric Magnetic Resonance ImagingAgedClinical ProtocolsCost-Benefit AnalysisData SystemsHumansMaleProstateProstatic NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesCognitive-targeting biopsyMultiparametric magnetic resonance imagingProstate cancerProstate imaging reporting and data system scoreProstate-specific antigen density

Identifiers

PMID32705477
OpenAlexW3044944057

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.