Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37606802›Full record

ReviewInsights into imaging2023

Diagnostic performance of prediction models for extraprostatic extension in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

MeiLin Zhu, JiaHao Gao, Fang Han, LongLin Yin, LuShun Zhang, Yong Yang, JiaWen Zhang

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Insights into imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Prognostic significance of the mEPE score in intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients undergoing ultrahypofractionated robotic SBRT.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

MeiLin ZhuDepartment of Radiology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200040, China.
JiaHao GaoDepartment of Radiology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200040, China.
Fang HanDepartment of Radiology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200040, China.
LongLin YinDepartment of Radiology, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 610072, China.
LuShun ZhangDepartment of Pathology and Pathophysiology, Chengdu Medical College, Development and Regeneration Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, 610500, China.
Yong YangSchool of Big Health & Intelligent Engineering, Chengdu Medical College, Chengdu, 610500, China. 365925141@qq.com.
JiaWen ZhangDepartment of Radiology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200040, China. zhangjw2000@126.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5288-1354
Fudan University · CNChengdu Medical College · CNUniversity of Electronic Science and Technology of China · CN

Funding

National Key Research and Development Project in China 2017YFC0113405National Natural Science Foundation of China 82071877
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIn recent decades, diverse nomograms have been proposed to predict extraprostatic extension (EPE) in prostate cancer (PCa). We aimed to systematically evaluate the accuracy of MRI-inclusive nomograms and traditional clinical nomograms in predicting EPE in PCa. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to provide baseline summative and comparative estimates for future study designs. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched up to May 17, 2023, to identify studies on prediction nomograms for EPE of PCa. The risk of bias in studies was assessed by using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST). Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity were obtained with bivariate random-effects model. Heterogeneity was investigated through meta-regression and subgroup analysis.

resultsForty-eight studies with a total of 57 contingency tables and 20,395 patients were included. No significant publication bias was observed for either the MRI-inclusive nomograms or clinical nomograms. For MRI-inclusive nomograms predicting EPE, the pooled AUC of validation cohorts was 0.80 (95% CI: 0.76, 0.83). For traditional clinical nomograms predicting EPE, the pooled AUCs of the Partin table and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) nomogram were 0.72 (95% CI: 0.68, 0.76) and 0.79 (95% CI: 0.75, 0.82), respectively.

conclusionPreoperative risk stratification is essential for PCa patients; both MRI-inclusive nomograms and traditional clinical nomograms had moderate diagnostic performance for predicting EPE in PCa. This study provides baseline comparative values for EPE prediction for future studies which is useful for evaluating preoperative risk stratification in PCa patients. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This meta-analysis firstly evaluated the diagnostic performance of preoperative MRI-inclusive nomograms and clinical nomograms for predicting extraprostatic extension (EPE) in prostate cancer (PCa) (moderate AUCs: 0.72-0.80). We provide baseline estimates for EPE prediction, these findings will be useful in assessing preoperative risk stratification of PCa patients. KEY POINTS: • MRI-inclusive nomograms and traditional clinical nomograms had moderate AUCs (0.72-0.80) for predicting EPE. • MRI combined clinical nomogram may improve diagnostic accuracy of MRI alone for EPE prediction. • MSKCC nomogram had a higher specificity than Partin table for predicting EPE. • This meta-analysis provided baseline and comparative estimates of nomograms for EPE prediction for future studies.

Indexed as

Extraprostatic extensionMagnetic resonance imagingMeta-analysisNomogramsProstatic neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID37606802
PMCPMC10444717
OpenAlexW4386045811

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.