Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38591853›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical urology2024

Diagnostic value of the abnormal digital rectal examination in the modern MRI-based prostate cancer diagnostic pathway.

Wasiq Sajjad, Vineetha Thankappannair, Syed Shah, Adham Ahmed, Kasra Saeb-Parsy, Christof Kastner, Benjamin Lamb, Vincent J Gnanapragasam

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Wasiq SajjadSchool of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5441-698X
Vineetha ThankappannairDepartment of Urology, Cambridge University Hospitals Trust, UK.
Syed ShahDepartment of Urology, Cambridge University Hospitals Trust, UK.
Adham AhmedDepartment of Urology, Cambridge University Hospitals Trust, UK.
Kasra Saeb-ParsyDepartment of Urology, Cambridge University Hospitals Trust, UK.
Christof KastnerDepartment of Urology, Cambridge University Hospitals Trust, UK.
Benjamin LambDepartment of Urology, Cambridge University Hospitals Trust, UK.
Vincent J GnanapragasamSchool of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4722-4207
Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

Department of Health IS-BRC-1215-20014
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Currently the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommends an abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) as a standalone referral criterion for suspected prostate cancer. Unlike referrals for a raised prostate-specific antigen (PSA) which are triaged directly to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), an abnormal DRE requires re-examination in a secondary clinic first. Here, we investigated the ongoing value of the abnormal DRE as a referral criterion. Methods: This study is a retrospective review of patients referred to secondary care for suspected prostate cancer based on an abnormal DRE over a 15-month period at a single UK hospital ( Results: A concurrent raised PSA was present in 65/158 (41%). Concordance between primary and secondary care DRE was only 72/158 (46%). The overall and significant cancer detection rate was 26/158 (16%) and 22/158 (14%), respectively. Among men with a concurrent raised PSA, 19/65 (29%) had significant cancer found, whereas with an abnormal primary care DRE and normal PSA ( Conclusions: This is one of the first studies to investigate the value of the DRE in contemporary practice. We propose that PSA is used to triage men with an abnormal DRE to MRI without needing a repeat DRE. If the PSA is normal, the diagnostic yield is low but may still warrant a repeat DRE to assess the need for further investigations. Additional multicentre studies are required to further validate our findings. Level of evidence: 4.

Indexed as

diagnosisDigital rectal examinationMRIprostate cancerprostate-specific antigen

Identifiers

PMID38591853
PMCPMC10775687
OpenAlexW4293768298

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.