Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39792015›Full record

ReviewRadiology. Imaging cancer2025

Recommendations from Imaging, Oncology, and Radiology Organizations to Guide Management in Prostate Cancer: Summary of Current Recommendations.

Andy Mew, Eva Chau, Kaustav Bera, Nikhil Ramaiya, Sree Harsha Tirumani

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Radiology. Imaging cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors.

Andy MewFrom Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio (A.M.); University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pa (E.C.); and Department of Radiology, University Hospitals, 11000 Euclid Ave, Bolwell B2600, Cleveland, OH 44115 (K.B., N.R., S.H.T.).ORCID 0000-0002-3119-4528
Eva ChauFrom Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio (A.M.); University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pa (E.C.); and Department of Radiology, University Hospitals, 11000 Euclid Ave, Bolwell B2600, Cleveland, OH 44115 (K.B., N.R., S.H.T.).ORCID 0000-0001-5605-8429
Kaustav BeraFrom Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio (A.M.); University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pa (E.C.); and Department of Radiology, University Hospitals, 11000 Euclid Ave, Bolwell B2600, Cleveland, OH 44115 (K.B., N.R., S.H.T.).
Nikhil RamaiyaFrom Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio (A.M.); University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pa (E.C.); and Department of Radiology, University Hospitals, 11000 Euclid Ave, Bolwell B2600, Cleveland, OH 44115 (K.B., N.R., S.H.T.).ORCID 0000-0002-1556-8622
Sree Harsha TirumaniFrom Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio (A.M.); University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pa (E.C.); and Department of Radiology, University Hospitals, 11000 Euclid Ave, Bolwell B2600, Cleveland, OH 44115 (K.B., N.R., S.H.T.).ORCID 0000-0002-5288-8916

Funding

Development of Magnetic Resonance Fingerprinting in Kidney for Evaluation of Renal Cell CarcinomaR01CA266702 · NCI · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI CHEN, YONG, TIRUMANI, SREE HARSHA · 2022 to 2025
$2.0M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA266702
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prostate cancer is the second most common malignancy among male individuals in the United States and requires careful imaging approaches because of its varied presentations. This review examines prostate cancer imaging guidelines from leading organizations, including the American College of Radiology, American Urological Association, European Association of Urology, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and serves as a reference highlighting commonalities and divergences in current imaging recommendations across prostate cancer states. We outline these organizations and their methods, focusing on their approaches to panel expertise, guideline development, evidence grading, and revision schedules. We then compare and contrast the role of various imaging modalities across states of prostate cancer management in the following categories: clinically suspected prostate cancer, clinically established prostate cancer: active surveillance or staging, monitoring metastatic disease, and posttreatment follow-up: recurrent or residual disease. Overall, there is consensus on the importance of multiparametric MRI in diagnosis and staging prior to active surveillance and the emerging role of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT in metastatic and recurrent disease. However, there is disparity in imaging recommendations for detecting metastases in unfavorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer and views on current applications of PSMA PET/CT. Ultimately, variations in radiologic expertise exist among guideline panels, and there continue to be inconsistencies in imaging recommendations in prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicProstatic NeoplasmsHumansMaleNeoplasm StagingSocieties, MedicalUnited StatesGenital/ReproductiveOncologyProstate

Identifiers

PMID39792015
PMCPMC11791666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.