Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38829960›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA2024

Prostate health index density aids the diagnosis of prostate cancer detected using magnetic resonance imaging targeted prostate biopsy in Taiwanese multicenter study.

Ching-Hsin Chang, Ping-Hsuan Yu, Po-Fan Hsieh, Jian-Hua Hong, Chih-Hung Chiang, Hao-Min Cheng, Hsi-Chin Wu, Chao-Yuan Huang, Tzu-Ping Lin

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Genomic insights for neuroendocrine prostate cancer.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2025
    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

9 authors.

Ching-Hsin ChangInstitute of Microbiology and Immunology, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, ROC.
Ping-Hsuan YuTaiwan Prostate Cancer Collaboration Group.
Po-Fan HsiehTaiwan Prostate Cancer Collaboration Group.
Jian-Hua HongTaiwan Prostate Cancer Collaboration Group.
Chih-Hung ChiangTaiwan Prostate Cancer Collaboration Group.
Hao-Min ChengProgram of Interdisciplinary Medicine (PIM), National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.
Hsi-Chin WuTaiwan Prostate Cancer Collaboration Group.
Chao-Yuan HuangTaiwan Prostate Cancer Collaboration Group.
Tzu-Ping LinTaiwan Prostate Cancer Collaboration Group.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMultiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) followed by MRI-targeted prostate biopsy is the current standard for diagnosing prostate cancer (PCa). However, studies evaluating the value of biomarkers, including prostate health index (PHI) and its derivatives using this method are limited. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of PHI density (PHID) in guiding MRI-targeted prostate biopsies to identify clinically significant PCas (csPCa).

methodsThe multicenter prospectively registered prostate biopsy database from three medical centers in Taiwan included patients with PHI and MRI-targeted and/or systematic prostate biopsies. We assessed the required values of prostate-specific antigen (PSA), prostate volume, PHI, PHID, and Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System (PI-RADS) score using multivariable analyses, receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, and decision curve analyses (DCA). csPCa was defined as the International Society of Urological Pathology Gleason group ≥2 PCa, with an emphasis on reducing unwarranted biopsies.

resultsThe study cohort comprised 420 individuals. Diagnoses of PCa and csPCa were confirmed in 62.4% and 47.9% of the participants, respectively. The csPCa diagnosis rates were increased with increasing PI-RADS scores (20.5%, 44.2%, and 73.1% for scores 3, 4, and 5, respectively). Independent predictors for csPCa detection included PHI, prostate volume, and PI-RADS scores of 4 and 5 in multivariable analyses. The area under the curve (AUC) for csPCa of PHID (0.815) or PHI (0.788) was superior to that of PSA density (0.746) and PSA (0.635) in the entire cohort, and the superiority of PHID (0.758) was observed in PI-RADS 3 lesions. DCA revealed that PHID achieved the best net clinical benefit in PI-RADS 3-5 and 4/5 cases. Among PI-RADS 3 lesions, cutoff values of PHID 0.70 and 0.43 could eliminate 51.8% and 30.4% of omitted biopsies, respectively.

conclusionPHI-derived biomarkers, including PHID, performed better than other PSA-derived biomarkers in diagnosing PCa in MRI-detected lesions.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingProstateProstatic NeoplasmsAgedHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMaleMiddle AgedProstate-Specific AntigenProstate-Specific Antigen

Identifiers

PMID38829960
PMCPMC12718838

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.