Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33538782›Full record

Trial reportJAMA oncology2021

Comparison of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy With Systematic Transrectal Ultrasonography Biopsy for Biopsy-Naive Men at Risk for Prostate Cancer: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Laurence Klotz, Joseph Chin, Peter C Black, Antonio Finelli, Maurice Anidjar, Franck Bladou, Ashley Mercado, Mark Levental, Sangeet Ghai, Silvia D Chang and 10 more

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT02936258 (A Phase III Multi-centre Open-label Randomized Controlled Trial of Multi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging), which is not on this map. Cited by 112 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
112citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
20.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT02936258 naunknown statusnot on this map

A Phase III Multi-centre Open-label Randomized Controlled Trial of Multi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-Targeted Biopsy Compared to Systematic Trans-rectal Ultrasound (TRUS) Guided Biopsy

TypeinterventionalSponsorCanadian Urology Research ConsortiumRan2016 to 2019Enrolled450ConditionsProstate CancerArmsStandard of Care, MRI, MRI Targeted Biopsy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

112 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 196 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. MR Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion-Guided Biopsy and Primary Focal Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

52 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 13 institutions in 3 countries.

Laurence KlotzDivision of Urology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Joseph ChinLondon Health Sciences Centre, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.
Peter C BlackVancouver Prostate Centre, Department of Urologic Sciences, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Antonio FinelliPrincess Margaret Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Maurice AnidjarJewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada.
Franck BladouDivision of Urology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Ashley MercadoVancouver Prostate Centre, Department of Urologic Sciences, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Mark LeventalJewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada.
Sangeet GhaiPrincess Margaret Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Silvia D ChangDepartment of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Laurent MilotBody and VIR Radiology Department, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Hospital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France.
Chirag PatelDivision of Urology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Zahra KassamLondon Health Sciences Centre, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.
Caroline MooreUniversity College London, London, England.
Veeru KasivisvanathanUniversity College London, London, England.
Andrew LoblawInstitute of Healthcare Policy and Management, Department of Radiation Oncology, Ontario Institute of Cancer Research, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Marlene KebabdjianDivision of Urology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Craig C EarleOntario Institute of Cancer Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Greg R PondDepartment of Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Masoom A HaiderToronto General Hospital, Department of Radiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
University of Toronto · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CASunnybrook Health Science Centre · CAUniversity College London · GBHealth Sciences Centre · CAHospices Civils de Lyon · FRInstitute of Cancer Research · CAJewish General Hospital · CALondon Health Sciences Centre · CAMcGill University · CAMcMaster University · CAPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre · CAWestern University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with targeted biopsy is an appealing alternative to systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis, but has yet to be widely adopted. Objective: To determine whether MRI with only targeted biopsy was noninferior to systematic TRUS biopsies in the detection of International Society of Urological Pathology grade group (GG) 2 or greater prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, prospective randomized clinical trial was conducted in 5 Canadian academic health sciences centers between January 2017 and November 2019, and data were analyzed between January and March 2020. Participants included biopsy-naive men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer who were advised to undergo a prostate biopsy. Clinical suspicion was defined as a 5% or greater chance of GG2 or greater prostate cancer using the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator, version 2. Additional criteria were serum prostate-specific antigen levels of 20 ng/mL or less (to convert to micrograms per liter, multiply by 1) and no contraindication to MRI. Interventions: Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) only if a lesion with a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS), v 2.0, score of 3 or greater was identified vs 12-core systematic TRUS biopsy. Main Outcome and Measures: The proportion of men with a diagnosis of GG2 or greater cancer. Secondary outcomes included the proportion who received a diagnosis of GG1 prostate cancer; GG3 or greater cancer; no significant cancer but subsequent positive MRI results and/or GG2 or greater cancer detected on a repeated biopsy by 2 years; and adverse events. Results: The intention-to-treat population comprised 453 patients (367 [81.0%] White, 19 [4.2%] African Canadian, 32 [7.1%] Asian, and 10 [2.2%] Hispanic) who were randomized to undergo TRUS biopsy (226 [49.9%]) or MRI-TB (227 [51.1%]), of which 421 (93.0%) were evaluable per protocol. A lesion with a PI-RADS score of 3 or greater was detected in 138 of 221 men (62.4%) who underwent MRI, with 26 (12.1%), 82 (38.1%), and 30 (14.0%) having maximum PI-RADS scores of 3, 4, and 5, respectively. Eighty-three of 221 men who underwent MRI-TB (37%) had a negative MRI result and avoided biopsy. Cancers GG2 and greater were identified in 67 of 225 men (30%) who underwent TRUS biopsy vs 79 of 227 (35%) allocated to MRI-TB (absolute difference, 5%, 97.5% 1-sided CI, -3.4% to ∞; noninferiority margin, -5%). Adverse events were less common in the MRI-TB arm. Grade group 1 cancer detection was reduced by more than half in the MRI arm (from 22% to 10%; risk difference, -11.6%; 95% CI, -18.2% to -4.9%). Conclusions and Relevance: Magnetic resonance imaging followed by selected targeted biopsy is noninferior to initial systematic biopsy in men at risk for prostate cancer in detecting GG2 or greater cancers. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02936258.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance Imaging, InterventionalMultiparametric Magnetic Resonance ImagingProstatic NeoplasmsBiopsyCanadaHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleProspective StudiesProstateUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID33538782
PMCPMC7863017
OpenAlexW3128562958

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.