ArticleProstate international2021
Effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy for detection of prostate cancer in comparison with systematic biopsy in our countries with low prevalence of prostate cancer: our first experience after 3 years.
Article in Prostate international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of multiparametric MRI and ultrasound-guided biopsy for early prostate cancer detection: A prospective cohort study.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Does the type of the previous biopsy affect the fusion prostate biopsy results?Prostate international · 2024Article
- A Comparison of Systematic, Targeted, and Combined Biopsy Using Machine Learning for Prediction of Prostate Cancer Risk: A Multi-Center Study.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2024Article
- How many cores should be taken from each region of interest when performing a targeted transrectal prostate biopsy?Prostate international · 2023Article
- Irreversible electroporation for prostate cancer using PSMA PET-CT.Prostate international · 2023Article
- Diagnostic value of integratedProstate international · 2022Article
- Prostate-specific Antigen Density as a Proxy for Predicting Prostate Cancer Severity: Is There Any Difference between Systematic and Targeted Biopsy?Saudi journal of medicine & medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSome men are subjected to multiple repeated biopsies because of ongoing suspicion of prostate cancer, which might subject them to complications. The aim of the study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/target fusion-guided biopsy in comparison with systematic biopsy in our low prevalence prostate cancer population, in terms of validity measure, case detection rate, and detection of clinically significant cancer.
methodsThis is a retrospective cohort study. All consecutive patients who met the inclusion criteria (all men with persistent high prostate-specific antigen levels >4 ng/ml and/or subnormal finding in direct rectal examination, with suspicious regions identified on prebiopsy MRI) were subjected to transrectal MRI/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy.
resultsA total of 165 cases met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. The cancer detection rate (CDR) of target biopsy was significantly higher than that of standard biopsy (27.9% vs 14%, respectively), and 25 cases (52%) were missed by standard strategy and correctly classified by multiparametric MRI with targeted biopsy (MRI-TB). On the other hand, only 2 cases (4.3%) were misclassified by MRI-TB, and one of them was clinically significant. There was an exact agreement between the 2 strategies in 15 (31%) cases. Targeted biopsy diagnosed 41.5% more high-risk cancers vs systematic biopsy (41.6% vs 6.2%, P < .001). The difference between sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value of MRI-TG varies between 80% and 98%.
conclusionThe CDR of prostate cancer in general and clinically significant cancer, in specific, is significantly higher with MRI-TG modality than with systematic modality. Yet, MRI-TG biopsy still misses some men with clinically significant prostate cancer. Hence, the addition of a 12-core biopsy is required to evade missing cases of clinically significant and insignificant cancer.
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.