ReviewRadiologic clinics of North America2024
Prostate Cancer Local Staging with Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
Review in Radiologic clinics of North America, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of risk factors for MRI-invisible prostate cancer-the significance of AGGF1 immunohistochemical detection and PSAD.The Canadian journal of urology · 2026Article
- Clinical and MRI features for predicting maximum cancer involvement of >50% in a single biopsy core among patients diagnosed with prostate cancer at initial systematic biopsy: a machine learning study.American journal of cancer research · 2026Article
- Incremental value of prostate-specific antigen density beyond PI-RADS and conventional MRI features for predicting the highest ISUP grade group in patients with prostate cancer diagnosed at initial systematic prostate biopsy.American journal of cancer research · 2026Article
- Construction of regulatory T cells specific genes predictive models of prostate cancer patients based on machine learning: a computational analysis and in vitro experiments.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Short-Term Urinary Incontinence After Radical Prostatectomy Is Still Based on Patients' Age, Nerve-Sparing Approach, and Surgical-Experience, Despite the Higher-Use of Robotic Surgery in 2022 Compared to 2016 Real-World Results of a Large Rehabilitation Center in Germany.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Deep learning-based image quality assessment: impact on detection accuracy of prostate cancer extraprostatic extension on MRI.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Article
- Impact of preoperative MRI on surgical outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a single-center retrospective cohort of 844 patients.Therapeutic advances in urologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurate determination of the local stage of prostate cancer is crucial for treatment planning and prognosis. The primary objective of local staging is to distinguish between organ-confined and locally advanced disease, with the latter carrying a worse clinical prognosis. The presence of locally advanced disease features of prostate cancer, such as extra-prostatic extension, seminal vesicle invasion, and positive surgical margin, can impact the choice of treatment. Over the past decade, multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) has become the preferred imaging modality for the local staging of prostate cancer and has been shown to provide accurate information on the location and extent of disease. It has demonstrated superior performance compared to staging based on traditional clinical nomograms. Despite being a relatively new technique, mpMRI has garnered considerable attention and ongoing investigations. Therefore, in this review, we will discuss the current use of mpMRI on prostate cancer local staging.
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.