Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32716685›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of urology2020

PI-RADS® Category as a Predictor of Progression to Unfavorable Risk Prostate Cancer in Men on Active Surveillance.

Alex Z Wang, Luke P O’Conno, Nitin K Yerram, Lori Long, Johnathan Zeng, Sherif Mehralivand, Stephanie A Harmon, Amir H Lebastchi, Michael Ahdoot, Patrick T Gomella and 7 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract read
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. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. PI-RADSv2.1: Current status.Turkish journal of urology · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Alex Z WangUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Luke P O’ConnoUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Nitin K YerramUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Lori LongBiometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Johnathan ZengCenter for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Sherif MehralivandMolecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Stephanie A HarmonClinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.
Amir H LebastchiUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Michael AhdootUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Patrick T GomellaUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Sandeep GurramUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Peter L ChoykeMolecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Maria J MerinoLaboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Joanna H ShihBiometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Bradford J WoodCenter for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Baris TurkbeyMolecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Peter A PintoUrologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
National Cancer Institute · USNational Institutes of Health · US

Funding

Center for Interventional OncologyZIDBC011242 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI WOOD, BRADFORD J · 2009 to 2025
$18.7M
Prostate SectionZIABC011081 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI PINTO, PETER · 2009 to 2025
$15.2M
Study of Hereditary Renal and Other Familial SyndromesZIABC010696 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI MERINO, MARIA · 2009 to 2025
$4.5M
Prostate Cancer ImagingZ01BC010655 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI CHOYKE, PETER L · 2005 to 2008
$2.1M
Interventional OncologyZIACL040015 · CLC · CLINICAL CENTER · PI WOOD, BRADFORD · 2009 to 2025
$0k
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 BC010655Intramural NIH HHS ZIA BC010696Intramural NIH HHS ZIA BC011081Intramural NIH HHS ZID BC011242
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe identified baseline imaging and clinical characteristics of patients that may improve risk stratification among patients being evaluated for active surveillance. MATERIALS AND

methodsFrom July 2007 to January 2020 patients referred to our institution for prostate cancer were evaluated and those who remained on active surveillance were identified. Men underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging upon entry into our active surveillance protocol during which baseline demographic and imaging data were documented. Patients were then followed and outcomes, specifically progression to Gleason Grade Group (GG)3 or greater disease, were recorded.

resultsOf the men placed on active surveillance 344 had at least 1 PI-RADS score documented. For those with an index lesion PI-RADS category of 5, 33% (17/51) had progression to GG3 or greater on active surveillance with a median time to progression of 31 months. When comparing the progression-free survival times and progression rates in each category, PI-RADS category was found to be associated with progression to GG3 or greater on active surveillance (p <0.01). On univariable analysis factors associated with progression included an index lesion PI-RADS category of 5, prostate specific antigen density and the size of the largest lesion. On multivariable analysis only PI-RADS category of 5 and prostate specific antigen density were associated with progression on active surveillance.

conclusionsPI-RADS lesion categories at baseline multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging during active surveillance enrollment can be used to predict cancer progression to GG3 or greater on active surveillance. This information, along with other clinical data, can better assist urologists in identifying and managing patients appropriate for active surveillance.

Indexed as

AgedBiopsy, Large-Core NeedleDisease ProgressionHumansImage-Guided BiopsyKallikreinsMagnetic Resonance Imaging, InterventionalMaleMiddle AgedMultiparametric Magnetic Resonance ImagingNeoplasm GradingProgression-Free SurvivalProspective StudiesProstateProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsKallikreinsKLK3 protein, humanProstate-Specific Antigenmultiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, prostatic neoplasmswatchful waiting

Identifiers

PMID32716685
PMCPMC8919058
OpenAlexW3046019790

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.