ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2025
Patients with multiple mpMRI region of interests: should we omit targeted biopsies of secondary lesions?
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development and validation of a novel clinical-radiological-pathological scoring system for preoperative prediction of extraprostatic extension in prostate cancer: a multicenter retrospective study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo assess the value of secondary lesion-targeted biopsy (SLx) in detecting prostate cancer (PCa) among patients with multifocal disease.
methodsA total of 298 biopsy-naïve patients with 612 lesions (all with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] v2.1 ≥ 3) underwent cognitive fusion-targeted biopsy (TB) combined with systematic biopsy (SB). Our primary endpoints were to compare the detection rates of PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa) across different biopsy strategies (Index lesion-targeted biopsy [ILx] vs. ILx + SLx and ILx + SB vs. ILx + SLx + SB) and to define potential indications for SLx using PI-RADS and PSA density (PSAD). Secondary endpoint was to evaluate the predictive performance of index lesion (IL)- and SL-based multivariate logistic regression (MVA) models for csPCa.
resultsThe overall detection rates for PCa and csPCa were 71% and 60%, with ILx + SLx + SB as the gold standard. Adding SLx to ILx modestly increased detection rates for PCa (63% vs. 65%, P = 0.016) and csPCa (55% vs. 58%, P = 0.004), but offered no significant advantage over ILx + SB. Stratification by PI-RADS and PSAD revealed that focusing on 80% intermediate- to high-risk lesions detected 39% csPCa while reducing 20% low-risk SLx at the cost of missing 1.6% csPCa. IL-based models outperformed SL-based models in predicting csPCa (Hosmer-Lemeshow P = 0.653 vs. 0.461).
conclusionSLx provides limited benefit in csPCa detection when ILx and SB have already been performed. Combining PI-RADS scores and PSAD helps identify patients who could benefit from SLx while avoiding unnecessary procedures in low-risk cases. CLINICAL
trial registrationNo. 2016 - 1252, January 2017.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39992404What 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.