Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38830219›Full record

ArticleAnnals of internal medicine2024

Lifetime Health and Economic Outcomes of Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging as First-Line Screening for Prostate Cancer : A Decision Model Analysis.

Roman Gulati, Boshen Jiao, Ra'ad Al-Faouri, Vidit Sharma, Sumedh Kaul, Aaron Fleishman, Kevin Wymer, Stephen A Boorjian, Aria F Olumi, Ruth Etzioni and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of internal medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. 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

11 authors.

Roman GulatiFred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington (R.G., R.E.).ORCID 0000-0002-7592-6567
Boshen JiaoFred Hutchinson Cancer Center and Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington (B.J.).
Ra'ad Al-FaouriDivision of Urologic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts (R.A., A.F.O., B.G.).ORCID 0000-0002-8586-0557
Vidit SharmaMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota (V.S., K.W., S.A.B.).ORCID 0000-0002-4715-5451
Sumedh KaulDepartment of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts (S.K., A.F.).
Aaron FleishmanDepartment of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts (S.K., A.F.).ORCID 0000-0001-7338-8235
Kevin WymerMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota (V.S., K.W., S.A.B.).
Stephen A BoorjianMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota (V.S., K.W., S.A.B.).
Aria F OlumiDivision of Urologic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts (R.A., A.F.O., B.G.).ORCID 0000-0001-5356-2558
Ruth EtzioniFred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington (R.G., R.E.).ORCID 0000-0002-9164-6370
Boris GershmanDivision of Urologic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts (R.A., A.F.O., B.G.).

Funding

TRANSCRIPTOME AND PROTEOME STRATIFICATION OF PROSTATE ADENOCARCINOMA PHENOTYPESP50CA097186 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI PETER S NELSON · 2002 to 2026
$58.1M
Modeling Precision Interventions for Prostate Cancer ControlU01CA253915 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI ETZIONI, RUTH D, TSODIKOV, ALEXANDER · 2020 to 2025
$6.5M
Modeling to Improve Prostate Cancer Outcomes Across Diverse PopulationsU01CA199338 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI DE KONING, HARRY J, ETZIONI, RUTH D · 2015 to 2019
$5.2M
Modeling and analytics for cancer diagnostics: traversing the data-evidence divideR35CA274442 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER CENTER · PI RUTH D ETZIONI · 2022 to 2026
$4.9M
Statistical modeling to support population and translational cancer researchR50CA221836 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI Roman Gulati · 2017 to 2026
$2.0M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA097186NCI NIH HHS R35 CA274442NCI NIH HHS R50 CA221836NCI NIH HHS U01 CA199338NCI NIH HHS U01 CA253915
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundContemporary prostate cancer (PCa) screening uses first-line prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, possibly followed by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for men with elevated PSA levels. First-line biparametric MRI (bpMRI) screening has been proposed as an alternative.

objectiveTo evaluate the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of first-line bpMRI versus PSA-based screening.

designDecision analysis using a microsimulation model. DATA SOURCES: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database; randomized trials. TARGET POPULATION: U.S. men aged 55 years with no prior screening or PCa diagnosis. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: U.S. health care system.

interventionBiennial screening to age 69 years using first-line PSA testing (test-positive threshold, 4 µg/L) with or without second-line mpMRI or first-line bpMRI (test-positive threshold, PI-RADS [Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System] 3 to 5 or 4 to 5), followed by biopsy guided by MRI or MRI plus transrectal ultrasonography. OUTCOME MEASURES: Screening tests, biopsies, diagnoses, overdiagnoses, treatments, PCa deaths, quality-adjusted and unadjusted life-years saved, and costs. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: For 1000 men, first-line bpMRI versus first-line PSA testing prevented 2 to 3 PCa deaths and added 10 to 30 life-years (4 to 11 days per person) but increased the number of biopsies by 1506 to 4174 and the number of overdiagnoses by 38 to 124 depending on the biopsy imaging scheme. At conventional cost-effectiveness thresholds, first-line PSA testing with mpMRI followed by either biopsy approach for PI-RADS 4 to 5 produced the greatest net monetary benefits. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: First-line PSA testing remained more cost-effective even if bpMRI was free, all men with low-risk PCa underwent surveillance, or screening was quadrennial. LIMITATION: Performance of first-line bpMRI was based on second-line mpMRI data.

conclusionDecision analysis suggests that comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of PCa screening are driven by false-positive results and overdiagnoses, favoring first-line PSA testing with mpMRI over first-line bpMRI. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisDecision Support TechniquesEarly Detection of CancerMultiparametric Magnetic Resonance ImagingProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsQuality-Adjusted Life YearsAgedBiopsyHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedUnited StatesProstate-Specific Antigen

Identifiers

PMID38830219
PMCPMC11250625

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.