ArticleThe Prostate2025
PI-RADS in Predicting csPCa: A Comparison Between Academic and Nonacademic Centers.
Article in The Prostate, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transperineal cognitive versus trans-rectal fusion biopsy under local anesthesia: multicenter outcomes in detection rates, complications, and feasibility.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Omitting biopsy in Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3? The role of Stockholm3 and prostate-specific antigen density findings from a prospective Swiss non-referral cohort.Prostate international · 2026Article
- The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Urologic Oncology: Current Insights and Challenges.Research and reports in urology · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe introduction of multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has revolutionized prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis, enhancing the localization of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) and guiding targeted biopsies. However, significant disparities in the execution, interpretation, and reporting of prostate MRI examinations across centers necessitate greater standardization and accuracy. This study compares the diagnostic efficacy of mpMRI from academic and nonacademic centers in detecting csPCa and identifies factors associated with csPCa detection. MATERIALS AND
methodsBetween July 2018 and October 2023, we prospectively followed 810 men at SS. Annunziata Hospital of Chieti who underwent MRI/US fusion biopsies due to elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and/or abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE). Patients with mpMRI-documented suspicious lesions classified as PI-RADS ≥ 3 were included. Patients were divided into two groups based on the source of their mpMRI (academic or nonacademic centers). All biopsies were conducted using the MRI/US fusion technique. Clinical, mpMRI, and pathological data were collected and analyzed. Statistical analyses were performed using R software.
resultsThe cohort included 354 patients from academic centers and 456 from nonacademic centers. There were no significant differences in patient demographics, such as age and PSA levels, between the groups. Patients at academic centers were more likely to receive a higher number of elevated PI-RADS scores compared to those at nonacademic centers (PI-RADS > 3: 72.6% vs. 62.3%, p = 0.003). Histopathological analysis revealed no significant differences in the ISUP grade distribution between groups. Increased age, PSA levels, and positive DRE were significantly associated with higher odds of detecting csPCa. Median PSA density was significantly higher in patients with csPCa compared to those without csPCa (0.14 vs. 0.11 ng/mL/cm³, p < 0.001). Academic centers exhibited a higher odds ratio for csPCa detection in patients with PI-RADS scores > 3 compared to nonacademic centers.
conclusionOur study highlights significant variability in PI-RADS score assignments between academic and nonacademic centers, affecting csPCa detection rates. This variability underscores the need for greater standardization in PI-RADS scoring to reduce disparities and improve diagnostic uniformity across centers.
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.