ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2022
Prostate cancer in PI-RADS scores 1 and 2 version 2.1: a comparison to previous PI-RADS versions.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Case-by-case combination of the prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2.1 with the Likert score to reduce the false-positives of prostate MRI: a proof-of-concept study.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Article
- Prospective Evaluation of PI-RADS Version 2.1 for Prostate Cancer Detection and Investigation of Multiparametric MRI-derived Markers.Radiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the validity of PI-RADS categories 1 and 2 version 2.1 (V2.1) as predictors of the absence of carcinoma and to reevaluate lesions that were analysed as suspicious prior to PI-RADS or according to PI-RADS versions 1 and 2 and classified as PI-RADS 1 or 2 in V2.1.
methodsRetrospective evaluation of 1170 multiparametric MRIs performed at one academic teaching hospital (2012-2019). Study cohort comprised 188 men that achieved PI-RADS scores 1 or 2 (V2.1) and underwent systematic and targeted biopsy, split into one group with suspect findings in the original reports that were created prior to PI-RADS or with version 1 and 2, and another group with unremarkable reports. Differences in presence of prostate cancer and PSA density were assessed by Chi-square and Fisher's exact test, and the negative predictive value (NPV) for both groups was conducted.
resultsThe NPV for clinically significant carcinoma (csCa) was 89.1% for 55 men with suspect findings in the original report and 93.2% for 133 men with negative MRI. There was no difference between the groups regarding the detection of csCa (p = 0.103). PSA density was significantly higher in the group with suspect original reports (p = 0.015).
conclusionA PI-RADS score 1 or 2 appears less likely to miss existing prostate cancer, although a small amount of csCa can be overlooked. In case of clinical suspicion or elevated PSA density and PI-RADS score 1 or 2, an individual decision has to be taken if biopsy is necessary or if monitoring is sufficient.
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.