Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34928437›Full record

ArticleEJNMMI research2021

Risk of metastatic disease using [

Venkata Avinash Chikatamarla, Satomi Okano, Peter Jenvey, Alexander Ansaldo, Matthew J Roberts, Stuart C Ramsay, Paul A Thomas, David A Pattison

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EJNMMI research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. [The Prostate · 2026
    Observational
  5. [Frontiers in medicine · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. [Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Evaluating the value ofCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2023
    Article
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Venkata Avinash ChikatamarlaDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Specialised PET Services, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, 4006, Australia. cvavinash@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8996-9146
Satomi OkanoStatistics Unit, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Australia.
Peter JenveyDepartment of Medical Imaging, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.
Alexander AnsaldoDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Specialised PET Services, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, 4006, Australia.
Matthew J RobertsDepartment of Urology, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.
Stuart C RamsayDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Specialised PET Services, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, 4006, Australia.
Paul A ThomasDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Specialised PET Services, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, 4006, Australia.
David A PattisonDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Specialised PET Services, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, 4006, Australia.
The University of Queensland · AURoyal Brisbane and Women's Hospital · AUQIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate prostate cancer imaging is critical for patient management. Multiple studies have demonstrated superior diagnostic accuracy of [

resultsThe median age, PSA level and ISUP grade were 70 years, 10 ng/mL and ISUP grade 3, respectively. There were 36.6% of patients with intermediate-risk and 60.8% of patients with high-risk disease. ISUP grade was associated with the presence of metastasis overall (p = 0.008) as well as regional nodal (p = 0.003), non-regional nodal (p = 0.041) and bone (p = 0.006) metastases. PSA level was associated with metastatic disease overall (p = 0.001), regional (p = 0.001) and non-regional nodal metastases (p = 0.004), but not with bone metastases (p = 0.087). There were too few visceral metastases for meaningful analysis. SUVmax of the primary prostatic tumour was associated with ISUP grade (p = 0.004), PSA level (p < 0.001) and AJCC stage (p = 0.034). PSA > 20 ng/mL and ISUP grade > 3 had a specificity of 85% (95% CI 78-91%) and 60% (95% CI 50-68%) and a sensitivity of 36% (95% CI 25-49%) and 62% (95% CI 49-74%), respectively, for detection of metastatic disease.

conclusionMetastatic disease according to [

Indexed as

[18F]PSMA-1007 PET/CTISUP gradeMetastasesProstate cancerPSAStagingSUVmax

Identifiers

PMID34928437
PMCPMC8688644
OpenAlexW4226257043

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.