ArticleWorld journal of urology2022
A comprehensive prostate biopsy standardization system according to quantitative multiparametric MRI and PSA value: P.R.O.S.T score.
Article in World journal of urology, 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.
- Challenges in magnetic resonance imaging-based detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in young patients: two alternative approaches.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- A novel clinically significant prostate cancer prediction system with multiparametric MRI and PSA: P.Z.A. score.BMC cancer · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough most studies believe that systematic biopsy (SB) and targeted biopsy (TB) should be performed simultaneously in patients with suspected prostate cancer, we believe that patients with the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score of 4/5 may be able to perform TB only.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the pathological results of patients undergoing transperineal prostate biopsy with PI-RADS 4 and 5 in our center. We use the data from 2019 to 2020 as the training set to establish the prediction model and the data from 2021 as the verification set to test the effectiveness. Through stepwise logistics regression analysis, we integrate statistically significant clinical factors and establish a model to further predict whether the target area is tumor.
resultsThe results showed that age (O), total number of lesions (T), histological region (R), PI-RADS score (S), and PSA density (P) were significantly correlated with the results of TB, and the formula was: p = 1/[1 + e^(- 11.387 + 0.058 × O + (- 0.736 × T) + 0.587 × R + 1.574 × S + 7.338 × P)]. The area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of the prediction model was 0.840 (95% CI 0.802-0.877), with the optimal threshold of 0.762. And the corresponding specificity and sensitivity were 0.765 and 0.752. In the validation set, the AUC of the prediction model was 0.816 (95% CI 0.759-0.874), which means that it has good prediction efficiency.
conclusionThe P.R.O.S.T score can effectively screen PI-RADS 4/5 lesions, which may help physicians shunt patients who need prostate biopsy to reduce unnecessary systematic biopsies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35869317What 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.