ArticleUrology annals
False-positive magnetic resonance imaging prostate cancer correlates and clinical implications.
Article in Urology annals. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the diagnostic value of three YiDiXie tests in prostate cancer: an observational prospective single-center study.Scientific reports · 2026Observational
- Prediction of prostate biopsy outcomes at different cut-offs of prostate-specific antigen using machine learning: a multicenter study.Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
- Clinical and Imaging Predictors of False-Positive and False-Negative Results in Prostate Multiparametric MRI Using PI-RADS Version 2.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2025Article
- Supervised contrastive loss helps uncover more robust features for photoacoustic prostate cancer identification.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Toward confident prostate cancer detection using ultrasound: a multi-center study.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2024Article
- Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Study in the mpMRI of the Prostate-Unnecessary or Underutilised? A Narrative Review.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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: False-positive (FP) multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MPMRI) obscures and swift needless biopsies in men with a high prostate-specific antigen. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective study, in which all patients who had been exposed to consecutive MP-MRI of the prostate combined with transrectal ultrasound-guided-magnetic resonance imaging fusion-guided prostate biopsy between 2017 and 2020 were involved in the study. The FP was measured as the number of biopsies that did not encompass prostate cancer divided by the whole number of biopsies. Results: The percentage of FP cases was 51.1%, the highest percentage was found in Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADs) 3 (37.7%) and the lowest was detected in PI-RAD 5 (14.5%). Those with FP biopsies are younger, and their total prostate antigen (PSA) and PSA density (PSAD) are significantly lesser. The area under the curve PSAD, age, and total PSA are 0.76, 0.74, and 0.69, respectively. An optimum PSAD value of 0.135 was chosen as a cutoff because it showed the highest sum of sensitivity and specificity, 68% and 69%, respectively. Conclusion: FP results of mpMRI were detected in more than half of our sample, more than one-third were presented in Pi-RAD3, improved imaging techniques to decrease FP rates are highly needed.
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.