ArticleBMC urology2022
Multiparametric transrectal ultrasound for the diagnosis of peripheral zone prostate cancer and clinically significant prostate cancer: novel scoring systems.
Article in BMC urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Combined predictive model for prostate cancer screening: Development and validation study.European journal of radiology open · 2025Article
- A novel model incorporating quantitative contrast-enhanced ultrasound into PI-RADSv2-based nomogram detecting clinically significant prostate cancer.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric ultrasound in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.Insights into imaging · 2023Review
- Contemporary Review of Multimodality Imaging of the Prostate Gland.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the diagnostic performance of multiparametric transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) and to design diagnostic scoring systems based on four modes of TRUS to predict peripheral zone prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).
methodsA development cohort involved 124 nodules from 116 patients, and a validation cohort involved 72 nodules from 67 patients. Predictors for PCa and csPCa were extracted to construct PCa and csPCa models based on regression analysis of the development cohort. An external validation was performed to assess the performance of models using area under the curve (AUC). Then, PCa and csPCa diagnostic scoring systems were established to predict PCa and csPCa. The diagnostic accuracy was compared between PCa and csPCa scores and PI-RADS V2, using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) and decision curve analysis (DCA).
resultsRegression models were established as follows: PCa = - 8.284 + 4.674 × Margin + 1.707 × Adler grade + 3.072 × Enhancement patterns + 2.544 × SR; csPCa = - 7.201 + 2.680 × Margin + 2.583 × Enhancement patterns + 2.194 × SR. The PCa score ranged from 0 to 6 points, and the csPCa score ranged from 0 to 3 points. A PCa score of 5 or higher and a csPCa score of 3 had the greatest diagnostic performance. In the validation cohort, the AUC for the PCa score and PI-RADS V2 in diagnosing PCa were 0.879 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.790-0.967) and 0.873 (95%CI 0.778-0.969). For the diagnosis of csPCa, the AUC for the csPCa score and PI-RADS V2 were 0.806 (95%CI 0.700-0.912) and 0.829 (95%CI 0.727-0.931).
conclusionsThe multiparametric TRUS diagnostic scoring systems permitted better identifications of peripheral zone PCa and csPCa, and their performances were comparable to that of PI-RADS V2.
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.