Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32955923›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of radiology2020

Prostate cancer measurements on serial MRI during active surveillance: it's time to be PRECISE.

Francesco Giganti, Vasilis Stavrinides, Armando Stabile, Elizabeth Osinibi, Clement Orczyk, Jan Philipp Radtke, Alex Freeman, Aiman Haider, Shonit Punwani, Clare Allen and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

13 authors.

Francesco GigantiDepartment of Radiology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5218-6431
Vasilis StavrinidesDivision of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Armando StabileDepartment of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
Elizabeth OsinibiDivision of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Clement OrczykDivision of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Jan Philipp RadtkeDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Alex FreemanDepartment of Pathology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Aiman HaiderDepartment of Pathology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Shonit PunwaniDepartment of Radiology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Clare AllenDepartment of Radiology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Mark EmbertonDivision of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Alex KirkhamDepartment of Radiology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Caroline M MooreDivision of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/S005897/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe PRECISE criteria for reporting multiparametric MRI in patients on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa) score the likelihood of clinically significant change over time using a 1-5 scale, where 4 or 5 indicates radiological progression. According to the PRECISE recommendations, the index lesion size can be reported using different definitions of volume (planimetry or ellipsoid formula) or by measuring one or two diameters. We compared different measurements using planimetry as the reference standard and stratified changes according to the PRECISE scores.

methodsWe retrospectively analysed 196 patients on AS with PCa confirmed by targeted biopsy who had two MR scans (baseline and follow-up). Lesions were measured on

resultsThe ellipsoid formula exhibited the highest correlation with planimetry at baseline (ρ = 0.97) and follow-up (ρ = 0.98) imaging, compared to the biaxial measurement and single maximum diameter. There was a significant difference (

conclusionThe ellipsoid formula could be used to monitor tumour growth during AS. Evidence of a significant yearly percentage volume change between radiological regression/stability (PRECISE 2-3) and progression (PRECISE 4-5) has been also observed. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The ellipsoid formula is a reasonable surrogate for planimetry in capturing tumour volume changes on

Indexed as

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance ImagingWatchful WaitingAgedDisease ProgressionHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingProstatic NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesTumor Burden

Identifiers

PMID32955923
PMCPMC7716009

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.