ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2020
Complementing the active surveillance criteria with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.
Article in Investigative and clinical 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 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does protocol heterogeneity in active surveillance influence clinical outcomes? Insights from a multicenter prostate cancer cohort.Investigative and clinical urology · 2026Article
- Impact of delay from transperineal biopsy to radical prostatectomy upon objective measures of cancer control.Asian journal of urology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the usefulness of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) to avoid misclassification of patients with clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) into active surveillance (AS). MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients with Gleason grade group (GG) 1 PCa on systematic biopsy who underwent mpMRI before radical prostatectomy (RP) were included. mpMRI and pathologic results were compared between the AS and NOT-AS candidates. Unfavorable disease was defined as the identification of T3-4 disease or GG upgrade in the RP specimen. We established an ideal cutoff Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score for predicting unfavorable disease, and analyzed the location of index lesions on mpMRI.
resultsPI-RADS scores were not significantly different between AS candidates (n=64) and NOT-AS candidates (n=136; p=0.629). Among 64 AS candidates, GG upgrading and unfavorable disease were diagnosed after RP in 24 (37.5%) and 25 (39.1%) patients, respectively. The rate of unfavorable disease was greater for patients with a PI-RADS score of 5 (83.3%) than in those with a score ≤4 (34.5%; p=0.030). Moreover, most PI-RADS 5 lesions in AS candidates were located in the anterior half of the prostate, with GG upgrading on targeted biopsy in 75.0% of cases.
conclusionsAmong the patients with GG 1 PCa, PI-RADS scores did not differ significantly between AS and NOT-AS candidates. Nonetheless, AS candidates with PI-RADS 5 lesions were diagnosed with unfavorable disease in >80% of RP specimens. Significant cancer located in the anterior half of the prostate including the transitional zone can be missed by systematic 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.