Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37065611›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of radiology open2023

Prediction of pelvic lymph node metastases and PSMA PET positive pelvic lymph nodes with multiparametric MRI and clinical information in primary staging of prostate cancer.

Andreas M Hötker, Urs Mühlematter, Stephan Beintner-Skawran, Soleen Ghafoor, Irene Burger, Martin Huellner, Daniel Eberli, Olivio F Donati

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of radiology open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Frontiers in medicine · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Andreas M HötkerUniversity Hospital Zurich, Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Rämistrasse 100, 8091 Zürich, Switzerland.
Urs MühlematterUniversity Hospital Zurich, Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Rämistrasse 100, 8091 Zürich, Switzerland.
Stephan Beintner-SkawranUniversity Hospital Zurich, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Rämistrasse 100, 8091 Zürich, Switzerland.
Soleen GhafoorUniversity Hospital Zurich, Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Rämistrasse 100, 8091 Zürich, Switzerland.
Irene BurgerCantonal Hospital Baden, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Im Ergel 1, 5404 Baden, Switzerland.
Martin HuellnerUniversity Hospital Zurich, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Rämistrasse 100, 8091 Zürich, Switzerland.
Daniel EberliUniversity Hospital Zurich, Department of Urology, Rämistrasse 100, 8091 Zürich, Switzerland.
Olivio F DonatiUniversity Hospital Zurich, Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Rämistrasse 100, 8091 Zürich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the accuracy of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI), Method: This retrospective IRB-approved study included 41 patients with prostate cancer undergoing mpMRI and Results: The Briganti 2019 nomogram performed superiorly (AUC: 0.89) compared to quantitative mpMRI parameters (AUCs: 0.47-0.73) and Conclusions: The Briganti 2019 nomogram performed superiorly in the prediction of metastatic and PSMA PET positive PLN, but the addition of parameters from mpMRI can further improve its accuracy. The combined model could be used to stratify patients requiring ePLND or PSMA PET.

Indexed as

Multiparametric MRIPelvic lymph nodesPET imagingProstate cancerPSMA

Identifiers

PMID37065611
PMCPMC10091040

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.