Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35788882›Full record

ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2022

Diagnostic value of combining PI-RADS v2.1 with PSAD in clinically significant prostate cancer.

Xiaoting Wei, Jianmin Xu, Shuyuan Zhong, Jinsen Zou, Zhiqiang Cheng, Zhiguang Ding, Xuhui Zhou

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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.

Xiaoting WeiDepartment of Radiology, The Eighth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, NO.3025, Shennan Middle Road, Shenzhen, 518036, China.
Jianmin XuDepartment of Radiology, Shenzhen People's Hospital (The Second Clinical Medical College, Jinan University; The First Affiliated Hospital, Southern University of Science and Technology), Shenzhen, 518020, China.
Shuyuan ZhongDepartment of Radiology, Shenzhen People's Hospital (The Second Clinical Medical College, Jinan University; The First Affiliated Hospital, Southern University of Science and Technology), Shenzhen, 518020, China.
Jinsen ZouDepartment of Radiology, Shenzhen People's Hospital (The Second Clinical Medical College, Jinan University; The First Affiliated Hospital, Southern University of Science and Technology), Shenzhen, 518020, China.
Zhiqiang ChengDepartment of Pathology, Shenzhen People's Hospital (The Second Clinical Medical College, Jinan University; The First Affiliated Hospital, Southern University of Science and Technology), Shenzhen, 518020, China.
Zhiguang DingDepartment of Radiology, Shenzhen People's Hospital (The Second Clinical Medical College, Jinan University; The First Affiliated Hospital, Southern University of Science and Technology), Shenzhen, 518020, China.
Xuhui ZhouDepartment of Radiology, The Eighth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, NO.3025, Shennan Middle Road, Shenzhen, 518036, China. zhouxuh@mail.sysu.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo investigate the diagnostic value of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.1 (PI-RADS v2.1) for clinically significant prostate cancer (CsPCa). We also aimed to combine PI-RADS v2.1 with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) derivatives to improve the predictive value of CsPCa.

methodsWe retrospectively collected relevant data who underwent standard MRI examinations of the prostate and subjected to a prostate biopsy at Shenzhen People's hospital from November 2014 to November 2019. Included 125 cases of CsPCa and 383 cases of non-CsPCa. All cases were scored using the PI-RADS v2.1. The clinical data collected included age, PSA, free PSA/total PSA, prostate volume and PSA density (PSAD). A univariate analysis was performed to identify statistically significant indicators. Logistic regression was used to analyze the predictive value of the multi-parameter combination on CsPCa.

resultsExcept age, the difference in all of indicators between the CsPCa group and non-CsPCa group was statistically significant. The PI-RADS score and PSAD value had the highest diagnostic value. Logistic regression analysis revealed that the PI-RADS score and PSAD value were independent predictors of CsPCa, with a regression model AUC of 0.935. CsPCa detection rates were low when the PI-RADS score ≤ 2 or the PI-RADS score = 3 and the PSAD value ≤ 0.33 ng/ml/ml.

conclusionCombining the PI-RADS score and PSAD value improved the predictive performance of CsPCa. Patients with a PI-RADS score ≤ 2 or a PI-RADS score = 3 and a PSAD value ≤ 0.33 ng/ml/ml can avoid an unnecessary biopsy.

Indexed as

Prostate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleRetrospective StudiesProstate-Specific AntigenBiopsyMagnetic resonance imagingProstate cancerProstate-specific antigen

Identifiers

PMID35788882

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.