Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40256662›Full record

ArticleEuropean urology open science2025

Targeting All Multiple Magnetic Resonance Imaging Prostate Lesions Does Not Enhance Cancer Detection: Insights from the YAU Prostate Cancer Group.

Fabio Zattoni, Giorgio Gandaglia, Giancarlo Marra, Filippo Carletti, Veeru Kasivisvanathan, Guillaume Ploussard, Tamás Fazekas, Alberto Martini, Jonathan Olivier, Peter K Chiu and 18 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European urology open science, 2025. 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. Article
  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

28 authors.

Fabio ZattoniUrologic Unit, Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padova, Padua, Italy.
Giorgio GandagliaDivision of Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Giancarlo MarraDivision of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, Molinette Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Filippo CarlettiUrologic Unit, Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padova, Padua, Italy.
Veeru KasivisvanathanDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, UCL, London, UK.
Guillaume PloussardLa Croix du Sud Hospital, Quint-Fonsegrives, France.
Tamás FazekasDepartment of Urology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Alberto MartiniDepartment of Urology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Jonathan OlivierDepartment of Urology, Lille University, Lille, France.
Peter K ChiuDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Massimo ValerioGeneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland.
Alessandro MarquisDivision of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, Molinette Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Paolo GonteroDivision of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, Molinette Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Hongqian GuoInstit***ute of Urology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People's Republic of China.
Junlong ZhuangInstitute of Urology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People's Republic of China.
Francesco BarlettaDivision of Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Riccardo LeniDivision of Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Giuseppe CirulliDivision of Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Alexander KretschmerDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Munich, Campus Großhadern, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, German.
Maria ApfelbeckDepartment of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.
Claudia KeschDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Pawel RajwaSecond Department of Urology, Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education, Warsaw, Poland.
Francesco GigantiDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, UCL, London, UK.
Roderick van den BerghDepartment of Urology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Fabrizio Dal MoroUrologic Unit, Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padova, Padua, Italy.
Alberto BrigantiDivision of Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Giacomo NovaraUrologic Unit, Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padova, Padua, Italy.
EAU-YAU Prostate Cancer Working Party

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and objective: Although diagnostic efficacy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in identifying index lesions (ILs) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients is well established, challenges arise when multiple lesions (MLs) are present. Determination of an optimal biopsy strategy for these patients is crucial. This study aims to assess the risk of detecting PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa; International Society of Urological Pathology [ISUP] grade group ≥2) when targeting suspicious MRI MLs in addition to the IL. Methods: We included 1310 biopsy-naïve patients with only a single MRI lesion (SL) and 621 men with MLs. Patients underwent a subsequent targeted biopsy (TBx) of each lesion, along with a systematic biopsy (SBx). We compared TBx alone versus TBx + SBx and evaluated whether the presence of MLs increases the risk of PCa and csPCa using a multivariable logistic regression model (MVA), while accounting for confounders. Key findings and limitations: Overall, PCa was detected in 57.6% and 51.2% of IL-TBx for the SL and ML groups, respectively ( Conclusions and clinical implications: Patients with MLs have a lower risk of PCa and csPCa. In case of MLs, a TBx of the IL + a concomitant SBx allows for the diagnosis of the vast majority of PCa and csPCa cases. The added value of a second TBx on the non-IL is modest, including only a 5.6% increase in the diagnosis of csPCa. Patient summary: We studied whether targeting multiple suspicious areas on prostate magnetic resonance imaging increases cancer detection. We found that patients with multiple lesions had a lower risk of prostate cancer than those with a single lesion. Targeting the largest suspicious area along with sampling the entire prostate led to the detection of most cancer cases, with little added benefit from targeting the other smaller areas.

Indexed as

Magnetic resonance imagingMultiple lesionsProstate biopsyTargeted biopsy

Identifiers

PMID40256662
PMCPMC12008533

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.