ArticleProstate international2020
Biparametric versus multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate: detection of clinically significant cancer in a perfect match group.
Article in Prostate international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Biparametric MRI for Detecting Prostate Cancer-A Comparative Multireader Multicase Accuracy Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The Accuracy of Biparametric Prostate MRI in the Pathway of Patients With Prostate Cancer.Cureus · 2025Article
- Comparative diagnostic performance of VI-RADS based on biparametric and multiparametric MRI in predicting muscle invasion in bladder cancer.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Evaluating biparametric MRI for diagnosing muscle-invasive bladder cancer with variant urothelial histology: a multicenter study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025Article
- Could Biparametric MRI Replace Multiparametric MRI in the Management of Prostate Cancer?Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Semi-quantitative and quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI parameters as prostate cancer imaging biomarkers for biologically targeted radiation therapy.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2022Article
- Temporal changes of PIRADS scoring by radiologists and correlation to radical prostatectomy pathological outcomes.Prostate international · 2022Article
- Diagnostic value of integratedProstate international · 2022Article
- Current Status of Biparametric MRI in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Literature Analysis.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Current Value of Biparametric Prostate MRI with Machine-Learning or Deep-Learning in the Detection, Grading, and Characterization of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- The value of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography (MRI/US)-fusion biopsy in clinically significant prostate cancer detection in patients with biopsy-naïve men according to PSA levels: A propensity score matching analysis.Prostate international · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiparametric (bp) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) could be an alternative MRI for the detection of the clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). PURPOSE: To compare the accuracies of prostate cancer detection and localization between prebiopsy bpMRI and postbiopsy multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) taken on different days, using radical prostatectomy specimens as the reference standards. MATERIAL AND
methodsData of 41 total consecutive patients who underwent the following examinations and procedures between September 2015 and March 2017 were collected: (1) magnetic resonance- and/or ultrasonography-guided biopsy after bpMRI; (2) postbiopsy mpMRI; and (3) radical prostatectomy with csPCa. Two radiologists scored suspected lesions on bpMRI and mpMRI independently using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2. The diagnostic accuracy of detecting csPCa and the Dice similarity coefficient were obtained. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) ratios were also obtained for quantitative comparison between bpMRI and mpMRI.
resultsDiagnostic accuracies on bpMRI and mpMRI were 0.83 and 0.82 for reader 1; 0.80 and 0.82 for reader 2. There are no significantly different values of diagnostic sensitivities or specificities between the readers or between MRI protocols. Intra-observer Dice similarity coefficient was significantly lower in reader 2, compared to that in reader 1 between the two MRI protocols. The range of mean ADC ratio was 0.281-0.635. There was no statistically significant difference in the ADC ratio between bpMRI and mpMRI.
conclusionsDiagnostic performance of bpMRI without dynamic contrast enhancement MRI is not significantly different from mpMRI with dynamic contrast enhancement MRI in the detection of csPCa.
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.