Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34427180›Full record

SynthesisDeutsches Arzteblatt international2021

Imaging of Prostate Cancer.

Heinz-Peter Schlemmer, Bernd Joachim Krause, Viktoria Schütz, David Bonekamp, Sarah Marie Schwarzenböck, Markus Hohenfellner

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Comparing the diagnostic value ofTranslational andrology and urology · 2024
    Article
  13. Radiology of fibrosis part III: genitourinary system.Journal of translational medicine · 2024
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Qualitative Data Are Lacking.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2022
    Article
  18. In Reply.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2022
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Heinz-Peter SchlemmerDivision of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg; Department of Urology, University of Heidelberg Medical Center; Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Rostock.
Bernd Joachim Krause
Viktoria Schütz
David Bonekamp
Sarah Marie Schwarzenböck
Markus Hohenfellner
German Cancer Research Center · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProstate cancer is the most common type of solid tumor in men and the second most common cause of cancer-related death in males in Germany. The conventional strategy for its primary detection, i.e., systematic ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in men who have elevated PSA levels and/or positive findings on digital rectal examination, fails to reveal all cases. The same is true of the use of conventional computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and skeletal scintigraphy for the early detection of recurrences and distant metastases.

methodsThis review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search, including the German clinical practice guideline on prostate cancer and systematic review articles.

resultsProspective multicenter trials have shown that the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer is markedly improved with multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and MR/TRUS fusion biopsy (TRUS = transrectal ultrasonography), compared to conventional systematic biopsy. A recent Cochrane review showed that the rate of overdiagnosis of low-risk prostate cancer was reduced with mpMRI and MR/TRUS fusion biopsy compared with conventional systematic biopsy (95/1000 vs. 139/1000), and that clinically significant prostate cancer was more reliably detected (sensitivity 72% vs. 63%), albeit with slightly lower specificity (96% vs. 100%). Prostate- specific membrane antigen (PSMA) hybrid imaging improves the detection of lymphogenic and bony metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer. PSMA hybrid imaging is most commonly used to detect biochemical recurrences. A metaanalysis showed that the detection rate depends on the PSA concentration: 74.1% overall, 33.7% with PSA <0.2 ng/mL, and 91.7% with PSA ≥= 2.0 ng/mL.

conclusionThe appropriate use of mpMRI and MR/TRUS fusion biopsy improves the initial detection of prostate cancer as well as the assessment of the prognosis. PSMA hybrid imaging is useful for the staging of high-risk patients and for the detection of recurrences. These methods are now recommended in the German clinical practice guideline on prostate cancer as well as in guidelines from other countries.

Indexed as

OverdiagnosisProstatic NeoplasmsHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleProspective StudiesProstate

Identifiers

PMID34427180
PMCPMC8767150
OpenAlexW3195229238

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.