ArticleFrontiers in surgery2022
bpMRI and mpMRI for detecting prostate cancer: A retrospective cohort study.
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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and validation of a nomogram combining PI-RADS v2.1 and clinical indicators for the diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients with PSA ≤ 20 ng/mL.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Multicenter Study Suggests Unsupervised Learning Derived From MRI Identifies Prognostic Subgroups in Prostate Cancer Patients After Prostatectomy.Radiology research and practice · 2026Article
- External validation of AI for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer using biparametric MRI.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Article
- Advances in imaging and artificial intelligence for precision diagnosis and biopsy guidance in prostate cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Biparametric vs. Multiparametric MRI in the Detection of Cancer in Transperineal Targeted-Biopsy-Proven Peripheral Prostate Cancer Lesions Classified as PI-RADS Score 3 or 3+1: The Added Value of ADC Quantification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We aimed to compare the detection rates of prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer(csPCa) by biparametric (bp-) and multiparameter magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI). Materials and Methods: A total of 699 patients who underwent transperineal prostate biopsy in the Department of Urology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University from January 2018 to December 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Multivariate analysis was used to explore the influencing factors associated with the detection rates of PCa and csPCa. According to MRI examination before biopsy, the patients were divided into bpMRI group and mpMRI group. The detection rates of PCa and csPCa by bpMRI and mpMRI were compared. Furthermore, stratified analysis was performed for patients in these two groups to compare the detection rates of PCa and csPCa at different tPSA intervals, different prostate volume (PV) intervals and different PI-RADS V2 scores. Results: A total of 571 patients were finally analyzed in this study after exclusion, and the overall detection rate of PCa was 54.5%. Multivariate analysis showed that patient age, tPSA level, prostate volume and PI-RADS V2 score were independent risk factors affecting the detection rates of PCa and csPCa. The detection rates of PCa and csPCa by bpMRI and mpMRI were comparable (51.3% vs. 57.9%, 44.0% vs. 48.0%, both Conclusion: For detecting PCa and csPCa, bpMRI and mpMRI had similar diagnostic efficacies, whereas mpMRI detected more PCa and csPCa in the tPSA interval of 10-20 ng/ml.
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.