ArticleBJUI compass2023
Impact of prebiopsy MRI on prostate cancer staging: Results from the Norwegian Prostate Cancer Registry.
Article in BJUI compass, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Increasing and more consistent use of pre-biopsy MRI in prostate cancer diagnosis: insights from a population-based study in the Netherlands.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Interpreting Prostate MRI Reports in the Era of Increasing Prostate MRI Utilization: A Urologist's Perspective.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Effect of preoperative PI-RADS assessment on pathological outcomes in patients who underwent radical prostatectomy.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2023Article
- Impact of prebiopsy MRI on prostate cancer staging: Results from the Norwegian Prostate Cancer Registry.BJUI compass · 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
12 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study is to evaluate the 2015 introduction of prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate (MRI-P) as the standard of care for diagnosing prostate cancer (PCa) by the Norwegian public health care authorities. There were three specific objectives of this study: first, to evaluate the consequences of using different TNM manuals for clinical T-staging (cT-staging) in a national setting; second, to determine if the data reveals that MRI-P based cT-staging is superior to digital rectal examination (DRE)-based cT-staging compared with pathological T-stage (pT-stage) post radical prostatectomy; and third, to assess whether treatment allocations have changed over time. Materials and Methods: All patients registered in the Norwegian Prostate Cancer Registry between 2004 and 2021 were retrieved and 5538 were eligible for inclusion. Concordance between clinical T-stage (cT-stage) and pT-stage was assessed by percentage agreement, Cohen's kappa and Gwet's agreement. Results: MR visualisation of lesions influences reporting of tumour extension beyond DRE findings. Agreement between cT-stage and pT-stage declined from 2004 to 2009, which coincided with an increase in the percentage being pT3. From 2010, agreement increased, which aligned with changes in cT-staging and the introduction of MRI-P. From 2017, regarding the reporting of cT-DRE and cT-Total (overall cT-stage), agreement diminished for cT-DRE but remained relatively stable (>60%) for cT-Total. Regarding treatment allocation, the study suggests that staging with MRI-P has shifted treatment towards radiotherapy in locally advanced high-risk disease. Conclusion: Introduction of MRI-P has affected cT-stage reporting. Agreement between cT-stage and pT-stage appears to have improved. This study suggests that use of MRI-P influences treatment decisions in certain patient subgroups.
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.