Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34254851›Full record

ArticleRadiology2021

Active Surveillance Strategies for Low-Grade Prostate Cancer: Comparative Benefits and Cost-effectiveness.

Stella K Kang, Rahul D Mali, Vinay Prabhu, Bart S Ferket, Stacy Loeb

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiology, 2021. 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 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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.

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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Active Surveillance for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Retrospective Single-Center Study.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Upgrading of Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer at Prostatectomy: Germline Risk Factors in a Prospective Cohort.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stella K KangFrom the Departments of Radiology (S.K.K., R.D.M., V.P.), Population Health (S.K.K., S.L.), and Urology (S.L.), New York University Grossman School of Medicine, 660 First Ave, Room 333, New York, NY 10016; Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.S.F.); and Manhattan VA Medical Center, New York, NY (S.L.).ORCID 0000-0003-2402-3787
Rahul D MaliFrom the Departments of Radiology (S.K.K., R.D.M., V.P.), Population Health (S.K.K., S.L.), and Urology (S.L.), New York University Grossman School of Medicine, 660 First Ave, Room 333, New York, NY 10016; Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.S.F.); and Manhattan VA Medical Center, New York, NY (S.L.).ORCID 0000-0002-2259-305X
Vinay PrabhuFrom the Departments of Radiology (S.K.K., R.D.M., V.P.), Population Health (S.K.K., S.L.), and Urology (S.L.), New York University Grossman School of Medicine, 660 First Ave, Room 333, New York, NY 10016; Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.S.F.); and Manhattan VA Medical Center, New York, NY (S.L.).ORCID 0000-0002-8933-7392
Bart S FerketFrom the Departments of Radiology (S.K.K., R.D.M., V.P.), Population Health (S.K.K., S.L.), and Urology (S.L.), New York University Grossman School of Medicine, 660 First Ave, Room 333, New York, NY 10016; Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.S.F.); and Manhattan VA Medical Center, New York, NY (S.L.).ORCID 0000-0003-2754-545X
Stacy LoebFrom the Departments of Radiology (S.K.K., R.D.M., V.P.), Population Health (S.K.K., S.L.), and Urology (S.L.), New York University Grossman School of Medicine, 660 First Ave, Room 333, New York, NY 10016; Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.S.F.); and Manhattan VA Medical Center, New York, NY (S.L.).ORCID 0000-0003-3933-9207
New York University · US

Funding

Optimal Strategy for Conservative Management of Prostate CancerK07CA178258 · NCI · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI LOEB, STACY · 2013 to 2017
$889k
NCI NIH HHS K07 CA178258
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Active surveillance (AS) is the recommended treatment option for low-risk prostate cancer (PC). Surveillance varies in MRI, frequency of follow-up, and the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score that would repeat biopsy. Purpose To compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of AS strategies for low-risk PC with versus without MRI. Materials and Methods This study developed a mathematical model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of surveillance strategies in a simulation of men with a diagnosis of low-risk PC. The following strategies were compared: watchful waiting, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and annual biopsy without MRI, and PSA testing and MRI with varied PI-RADS thresholds for biopsy. MRI strategies differed regarding scheduling and use of PI-RADS score of at least 3, or a PI-RADS score of at least 4 to indicate the need for biopsy. Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated by using microsimulation. Sensitivity analysis was used to assess the impact of varying parameter values on results. Results For the base case of 60-year-old men, all strategies incorporating prostate MRI extended QALYs and life-years compared with watchful waiting and non-MRI strategies. Annual MRI strategies yielded 16.19 QALYs, annual biopsy with no MRI yielded 16.14 QALYs, and watchful waiting yielded 15.94 QALYs. Annual MRI with PI-RADS score of at least 3 or of at least 4 as the biopsy threshold and annual MRI with biopsy even after MRI with negative findings offered similar QALYs and the same unadjusted life expectancy: 23.05 life-years. However, a PI-RADS score of at least 4 yielded 42% fewer lifetime biopsies. With a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100 000 per QALY, annual MRI with biopsy for lesions with PI-RADS scores of 4 or greater was most cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $67 221 per QALY). Age, treatment type, risk of initial grade misclassification, and quality-of-life impact of procedural complications affected results. Conclusion The use of active surveillance (AS) with biopsy decisions guided by findings from annual MRI reduces the number of biopsies while preserving life expectancy and quality of life. Biopsy in lesions with PI-RADS scores of 4 or greater is likely the most cost-effective AS strategy for men with low-risk prostate cancer who are younger than 70 years. © RSNA, 2021

Indexed as

BiopsyCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansLife ExpectancyMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingProstatic NeoplasmsQuality-Adjusted Life YearsWatchful Waiting

Identifiers

PMID34254851
PMCPMC8409107
OpenAlexW3179789400

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.