ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2024
A preoperative scoring system for predicting the extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy using magnetic resonance imaging and clinical factors.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 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.
- PI-RADS v2.1 for prostate MRI: current applications, ongoing debates, and synergies with advanced technologies-a narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Review
- Review
- A comprehensive scoring system integrating clinical and radiological variables for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer on bi-parameter MRI: multi-center comparison with multi-parametric MRI.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a novel clinical-radiological-pathological scoring system for preoperative prediction of extraprostatic extension in prostate cancer: a multicenter retrospective study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to develop a preoperative prediction model for extraprostatic extension (EPE) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients following radical prostatectomy (RP) using MRI and clinical factors.
methodsThis retrospective study enrolled 266 consecutive patients who underwent RP for PCa in 2022. These patients were divided into a training set (n = 187) and a test set (n = 79) through random assignment. The evaluated variables included age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, prostate volume, PSA density (PSAD), index tumor length on MRI, Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) category, and EPE-related MRI features as defined by PI-RADS v2.1. A predictive model was constructed through multivariable logistic regression and subsequently translated into a scoring system. The performance of this scoring system in terms of prediction and calibration was assessed using C statistics and the Hosmer‒Lemeshow test.
resultsAmong patients in the training and test cohorts, 74 (39.6%) and 25 (31.6%), respectively, exhibited EPE after RP. The formulated scoring system incorporated the following factors: PSAD, index tumor length, bulging prostatic contour, and tumor-capsule interface > 10 mm as identified on MRI. This scoring system demonstrated strong prediction performance for EPE in both the training (C statistic, 0.87 [95% confidence interval, 0.86-0.87]) and test cohorts (C statistic, 0.85 [0.83-0.89]). Furthermore, the scoring system exhibited good calibration in both cohorts (P = 0.988 and 0.402, respectively).
conclusionOur scoring system, built upon MRI features defined by the PI-RADS, offers valuable assistance in assessing the likelihood of EPE after RP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38755453What 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.