Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35145904›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2021

Diagnostic Performance of Extraprostatic Extension Grading System for Detection of Extraprostatic Extension in Prostate Cancer: A Diagnostic Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Wei Li, Wenwen Shang, Feng Lu, Yuan Sun, Jun Tian, Yiman Wu, Anding Dong

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors.

Wei LiDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jiangsu Vocational College of Medicine, Yancheng, China.
Wenwen ShangDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jiangsu Vocational College of Medicine, Yancheng, China.
Feng LuDepartment of Radiology, Wuxi No. 2 People's Hospital, Wuxi, China.
Yuan SunDepartment of Burn and Plastic Surgery, 71st Group Army Hospital of People's Liberation Army of China, Xuzhou, China.
Jun TianDepartment of Basic Medicine, Jiangsu Vocational College of Medicine, Yancheng, China.
Yiman WuDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jiangsu Vocational College of Medicine, Yancheng, China.
Anding DongDepartment of Medical Imaging, Jiangsu Vocational College of Medicine, Yancheng, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the diagnostic performance of the extraprostatic extension (EPE) grading system for detection of EPE in patients with prostate cancer (PCa). MATERIALS AND

methodsWe performed a literature search of Web of Science, MEDLINE (Ovid and PubMed), Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google Scholar to identify eligible articles published before August 31, 2021, with no language restrictions applied. We included studies using the EPE grading system for the prediction of EPE, with histopathological results as the reference standard. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated with the bivariate model. Quality assessment of included studies was performed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool.

resultsA total of 4 studies with 1,294 patients were included in the current systematic review. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.82 (95% CI 0.76-0.87) and 0.63 (95% CI 0.51-0.73), with the area under the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) curve of 0.82 (95% CI 0.79-0.85). The pooled LR+, LR-, and DOR were 2.20 (95% CI 1.70-2.86), 0.28 (95% CI 0.22-0.36), and 7.77 (95% CI 5.27-11.44), respectively. Quality assessment for included studies was high, and Deeks's funnel plot indicated that the possibility of publication bias was low (

conclusionThe EPE grading system demonstrated high sensitivity and moderate specificity, with a good inter-reader agreement. However, this scoring system needs more studies to be validated in clinical practice.

Indexed as

diagnostic performanceextraprostatic extensionmagnetic resonance imagingprostate neoplasmssystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35145904
PMCPMC8824228

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.