ArticleThe British journal of radiology2024
Accuracy of MRI-ultrasound fusion-guided and systematic biopsy of the prostate.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2024. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy for PI-RADS ≥3 peripheral zone lesions in multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging: correlation with clinically significant prostate cancer.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2026Article
- Article
- Advances in focal therapy for prostate cancer: current modalities, outcomes, and future directions.Prostate international · 2026Review
- Advances in imaging and artificial intelligence for precision diagnosis and biopsy guidance in prostate cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesProstate multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) with subsequent targeted biopsy of suspicious lesions has a critical role in the diagnostic workup of prostate cancer. The objective was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of systematic biopsies, targeted biopsies, and the combination of both in prostate cancer detection.
methodsFrom January 1, 2013 to June 1, 2022, biopsy-naïve and prior biopsy-negative patients who underwent both systematic and targeted biopsies were included. MRIs were evaluated according to PI-RADS with biopsy threshold set at PI-RADS ≥3. Systematic biopsies consisted of 8-12 cores, based on prostate volume. Overall prostate cancer and clinically significant cancer (Gleason Score ≥3 + 4) detection rates were stratified based on PI-RADS and location within the prostate, and compared between biopsy types using McNemar test.
resultsAmong 867 patients, 615 had prostate cancer, with 434 clinically significant cases. Overall detection rates were: PI-RADS 3 48%, PI-RADS 4 72%, and PI-RADS 5 90%. Detection rates for clinically significant cancer were 21%, 53%, and 72%, respectively. The combination of biopsy methods was most accurate in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (P < .001). Targeted biopsies alone detected more clinically significant prostate cancer than systematic biopsies alone (43.1% vs 40.3%, P = .046). For posterior PI-RADS 5 lesions, no statistically significant difference was found between all biopsy methods.
conclusionsIn the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, the combination of systematic and targeted biopsies proves most effective. Targeted biopsies rarely missed significant cancer for posterior PI-RADS 5 lesions, suggesting systematic biopsies could be reserved for instances where targeted biopsy results are negative. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This study emphasizes on the efficacy of mpMRI and targeted biopsies in suspected prostate cancer in real-world clinical context. For PI-RADS 5 lesions, systematic biopsies provide limited clinical benefit and may only be necessary when targeted biopsy results are negative.
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.