ArticleFrontiers in surgery2022
Combining targeted and systematic prostate biopsy improves prostate cancer detection and correlation with the whole mount histopathology in biopsy naïve and previous negative biopsy patients.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimizing Prostate Biopsy Pathways: Integrating MRI-Targeted, Systematic Sampling, and Clinical Judgment in the PSA-Era.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Role of Systematic Biopsy in the Era of Targeted Biopsy: A Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Review
- Prostate Biopsy in the Case of PIRADS 5-Is Systematic Biopsy Mandatory?Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- MRI-Guided Targeted and Systematic Prostate Biopsies as Prognostic Indicators for Prostate Cancer Treatment Decisions.Cancers · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
30 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Guidelines for previous negative biopsy (PNB) cohorts with a suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa) after positive multiparametric (mp) magnetic-resonance-imaging (MRI) often favour the fusion-guided targeted prostate-biopsy (TB) only approach for Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) ≥3 lesions. However, recommendations lack direct biopsy performance comparison within biopsy naïve (BN) vs. PNB patients and its prognostication of the whole mount pathology report (WMPR), respectively. We suppose, that the combination of TB and concomitant TRUS-systematic biopsy (SB) improves the PCa detection rate of PI-RADS 2, 3, 4 or 5 lesions and the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP)-grade predictability of the WMPR in BN- and PNB patients. Methods: Patients with suspicious mpMRI, elevated prostate-specific-antigen and/or abnormal digital rectal examination were included. All PI-RADS reports were intramurally reviewed for biopsy planning. We compared the PI-RADS score substratified TB, SB or combined approach (TB/SB) associated BN- and PNB-PCa detection rate. Furthermore, we assessed the ISUP-grade variability between biopsy cores and the WMPR. Results: According to BN ( Conclusion: Despite csPCa is more frequently found in BN patients, the TB/SB method always detected a significantly higher number of csPCa within PI-RADS 3, 4 or 5 reports of our BN and PNB group. The TB/SB strategy predicts the ISUP-grade best in the total and BN cohort and in general shows the lowest upgrading rates, emphasizing its value not only in BN but also PNB patients.
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.