Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39125483›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Biparametric vs. Multiparametric MRI in the Detection of Cancer in Transperineal Targeted-Biopsy-Proven Peripheral Prostate Cancer Lesions Classified as PI-RADS Score 3 or 3+1: The Added Value of ADC Quantification.

Elena Bertelli, Michele Vizzi, Chiara Marzi, Sandro Pastacaldi, Alberto Cinelli, Martina Legato, Ron Ruzga, Federico Bardazzi, Vittoria Valoriani, Francesco Loverre and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  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

19 authors.

Elena BertelliDepartment of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5218-7733
Michele VizziDepartment of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.ORCID 0009-0005-5822-1935
Chiara MarziDepartment of Statistics, Informatics and Applications "G. Parenti" (DiSIA), University of Florence, 50134 Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1791-3573
Sandro PastacaldiDepartment of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Alberto CinelliDepartment of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Martina LegatoDepartment of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Ron RuzgaDepartment of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Federico BardazziDepartment of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Vittoria ValorianiDepartment of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Francesco LoverreDepartment of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Francesco ImpagliazzoDepartment of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Diletta CozziDepartment of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7028-9047
Samuele NardoniUnit of Urological Minimally Invasive, Robotic Surgery and Kidney Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Davide FacchianoUnit of Urological Minimally Invasive, Robotic Surgery and Kidney Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Sergio SerniUnit of Urological Minimally Invasive, Robotic Surgery and Kidney Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Lorenzo MasieriUnit of Urological Minimally Invasive, Robotic Surgery and Kidney Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Andrea MinerviniDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Simone AgostiniDepartment of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Vittorio MieleDepartment of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7848-1567

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBiparametric MRI (bpMRI) has an important role in the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa), by reducing the cost and duration of the procedure and adverse reactions. We assess the additional benefit of the ADC map in detecting prostate cancer (PCa). Additionally, we examine whether the ADC value correlates with the presence of clinically significant tumors (csPCa).

methods104 peripheral lesions classified as PI-RADS v2.1 score 3 or 3+1 at the mpMRI underwent transperineal MRI/US fusion-guided targeted biopsy.

resultsThe lesions were classified as PI-RADS 3 or 3+1; at histopathology, 30 were adenocarcinomas, 21 of which were classified as csPCa. The ADC threshold that maximized the Youden index in order to predict the presence of a tumor was 1103 (95% CI (990, 1243)), with a sensitivity of 0.8 and a specificity of 0.59; both values were greater than those found using the contrast medium, which were 0.5 and 0.54, respectively. Similar results were also found with csPCa, where the optimal ADC threshold was 1096 (95% CI (988, 1096)), with a sensitivity of 0.86 and specificity of 0.59, compared to 0.49 and 0.59 observed in the mpMRI.

conclusionsOur study confirms the possible use of a quantitative parameter (ADC value) in the risk stratification of csPCa, by reducing the number of biopsies and, therefore, the number of unwarranted diagnoses of PCa and the risk of overtreatment.

Indexed as

ADCbiparametric MRImultiparametric MRIprostate biopsyprostate cancer

Identifiers

PMID39125483
PMCPMC11312064

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.