Trial reportScientific reports2021
Analysis of risk factors for determining the need for prostate biopsy in patients with negative MRI.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Diagnostic Performance of Prostate-specific Antigen Density for Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Era of Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.European urology oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Clinical, and Biopsy Findings in Suspected Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2024Pooled it
- Enhancing Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: A Comparative Analysis of Combined Fusion and Systematic Biopsy Methods-A Single-Center Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Value of serum free prostate-specific antigen density in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.Irish journal of medical science · 2023Article
- Combining targeted and systematic prostate biopsy improves prostate cancer detection and correlation with the whole mount histopathology in biopsy naïve and previous negative biopsy patients.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Urine Exosomal AMACR Is a Novel Biomarker for Prostate Cancer Detection at Initial Biopsy.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Article
- A nomogram to predict the absence of clinically significant prostate cancer in males with negative MRIInternational braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
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
To analyze the clinical characteristics of patients with negative biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) who didn't need prostate biopsies (PBs). A total of 1,012 male patients who underwent PBs in the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from March 2018 to November 2019, of 225 had prebiopsy negative bpMRI (defined as Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS 2.1) score less than 3). The detection efficiency of clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa) was assessed according to age, digital rectal examination (DRE), prostate volume (PV) on bpMRI, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and PSA density (PSAD). The definition of CSPCa for Gleason score > 6. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis were used to identify predictive factors of absent CSPCa on PBs. Moreover, absent CSPCa contained clinically insignificant prostate cancer (CIPCa) and benign result. The detection rates of present prostate cancer (PCa) and CSPCa were 27.11% and 16.44%, respectively. Patients who were diagnosed as CSPCa had an older age (P < 0.001), suspicious DRE (P < 0.001), a smaller PV (P < 0.001), higher PSA value (P = 0.008) and higher PSAD (P < 0.001) compared to the CIPCa group and benign result group. PSAD < 0.15 ng/ml/cm
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.