Combined mpMRI/US fusion targeted and concurrent standard biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer: a retrospective study.

Samuel Hubbard, Shane A Wells, Kelly Olson, David F Jarrard, Wei Huang

Open access · greenAbstract read

In one paragraph

Article in American journal of translational research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact, top 78% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Samuel HubbardDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health Madison, WI, USA.

Shane A WellsDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health Madison, WI, USA.

Kelly OlsonDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health Madison, WI, USA.

David F JarrardDepartment of Urology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health Madison, WI, USA.

Wei HuangDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health Madison, WI, USA.

University of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this retrospective study we compared the PCa detection rates between combined (combined MRI/US fusion targeted biopsy with concurrent standard biopsy) and standard systemic, combined and targeted (component), and targeted (component) and concurrent standard (component) biopsies.

designTwo cohorts, totaling 735 cases, were selected from the University of Wisconsin Pathology archive. 390 cases (cohort 1) were combined biopsies from 2017-2020 and 345 cases (cohort 2) were part of the standard US-guided systematic biopsies from the same period. PCa was stratified into three categories: low, intermediate, and high risks.

resultsWe found that combined biopsy was significantly better than the standard biopsy in detection of PCa (65.4% vs. 51.6%, P<0.01) and intermediate-risk PCa (18.7% vs. 10.4%, P=0.05) but only slightly better at detecting high-risk PCa (26.7% vs. 23.5%, P=0.32). Further examining the biopsy results in cohort 1, we found that combined biopsy was superior to targeted biopsy (65.4% vs. 56.9%, P=0.02) or concurrent standard biopsy (65.4% vs. 52.1%, P=0.0002) in PCa detection. Combined biopsy detected significantly more high-risk PCa than concurrent standard biopsy (26.7% vs. 17.4, P=0.002), but the difference in detecting high-risk PCa between combined and targeted biopsies was not significant (26.7% vs. 22.1%, P=0.133). Similarly, the differences in detecting PCa and high-risk PCa between targeted and concurrent standard biopsies were not significant (56.9% vs. 52.1%, P=0.172 and 22.1% vs. 17.4, P=0.133, respectively). Both targeted and concurrent standard biopsies missed PCa of each risk level.

conclusionCombined MRI/US fusion targeted plus standard prostate biopsy is a superior technique for the detection of PCa and clinically significant PCa.

Indexed as

mpMRI/US fusion targeted biopsyProstate cancerstandard US-guided systematic biopsy

Identifiers

PMID34786148

PMCPMC8581879

OpenAlexW3211822825

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.