Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39816937›Full record

ArticleProstate international2024

Negative magnetic resonance imaging cannot be used to omit an initial prostate biopsy - An ambispective study.

Kevin Arulraj, Sanjay Sharma, Chandan J Das, Amlesh Seth, Rajeev Kumar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Prostate international, 2024. 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. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  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.

Kevin ArulrajDepartments of Urology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Sanjay SharmaRadiodiagnosis and Interventional Radiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Chandan J DasRadiodiagnosis and Interventional Radiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Amlesh SethDepartments of Urology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Rajeev KumarDepartments of Urology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Up to 40% of patients with suspected prostate cancer (PCa) have a negative prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging (nMRI), and up to 15% of them may have clinically significant PCa (csPCa). The ability to predict the presence of csPCa despite nMRI may help avoid unnecessary biopsies. We aimed to determine the negative predictive value (NPV) of mpMRI, the influence of MRI reporting patterns in clinical practice, and the factors that might predict csPCa among men with an nMRI. Methodology: In an IRB-approved, ambispective study, men who underwent prostate biopsy from 2016 to 2023 and had a prebiopsy MRI, were included to determine the presence of csPCa. The reporting patterns of institutional and noninstitutional MRI were evaluated. Age, digital rectal examination (DRE) findings, prostate specific antigen (PSA), PSA density (PSAD), and MRI reports were evaluated for their ability to predict csPCa in men with nMRI. Results: 1660 patients who underwent prostate biopsy were assessed for eligibility, and 685 patients were enrolled in the study. The median age, PSA and PSAD were 60 years, 11.63 ng/ml and 0.23 ng/ml/cm Conclusion: 34% of men with negative MRIs were found to harbor csPCa on prostate biopsy. The NPV of institutional MRI was higher than for noninstitutional MRI. Men with an abnormal DRE or PSAD ≥0.25 ng/ml/cc had a higher incidence of csPCa despite an nMRI.

Indexed as

BiopsyDetectionMRIProstate cancerScreening

Identifiers

PMID39816937
PMCPMC11733748

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.