Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40305682›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of urology2025

Magnetic Resonance Imaging at Second Surveillance Biopsy After Diagnosis in Patients With Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer in the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study.

Meera R Chappidi, Lisa F Newcomb, Yingye Zheng, Menghan Liu, Jeannette M Schenk, Kehao Zhu, Claire M de la Calle, James D Brooks, Peter R Carroll, Atreya Dash and 9 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

19 authors.

Meera R ChappidiDepartment of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Lisa F NewcombDepartment of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Yingye ZhengBiostatistics Program, Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington.
Menghan LiuBiostatistics Program, Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington.
Jeannette M SchenkCancer Prevention Program, Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington.
Kehao ZhuBiostatistics Program, Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington.
Claire M de la CalleDepartment of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
James D BrooksDepartment of Urology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Peter R CarrollDepartment of Urology, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, California.
Atreya DashDepartment of Urology, Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington.
Christopher P FilsonDepartment of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia.
Martin E GleaveDepartment of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Michael A LissDepartment of Urology, University of Texas Health Sciences Center, San Antonio, Texas.
Frances MartinDepartment of Urology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Jesse K McKenneyRobert J. Tomsich Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Todd M MorganDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Andrew A WagnerDivision of Urology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
Peter S NelsonDepartment of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Daniel W LinDepartment of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

Funding

The Early Detection Research Network: Data Management and Coordinating CenterU24CA086368 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI RUTH D ETZIONI, Ziding Feng · 2010 to 2026
$75.7M
Prostate cancer Active Surveillance Study (PASS) Cohort: Infrastructure Support for Cancer ResearchU01CA224255 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI LIN, DANIEL W. · 2019 to 2023
$6.7M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA224255NCI NIH HHS U24 CA086368
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeNo clear guidelines exist regarding MRI use after confirmatory biopsy during active surveillance. Our objective was to evaluate MRI performance after confirmatory biopsy in patients with vs without prior MRI-informed biopsy. MATERIALS AND

methodsPatients in the Canary Prostate Active Surveillance Study with Gleason Grade Group (GG) 1 disease undergoing MRI-informed Biopsy 2, defined as second surveillance biopsy after diagnosis, were separated into prior vs no prior MRI-informed biopsy groups. Primary outcome was reclassification (≥GG2) at MRI-informed Biopsy 2. Reclassification rates and location (systematic cores, targeted cores, both) were compared between groups. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of reclassification.

resultsPatients with (n = 101) vs without (n = 103) prior MRI-informed biopsy had lower reclassification rates at Biopsy 2 (21% vs 36%,

conclusionsThese results support MRI use at Biopsy 2 and suggest negative surveillance MRI should not replace Biopsy 2. Both targeted and systematic cores should be taken at Biopsy 2 in patients with and without prior MRI on active surveillance.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingProstateProstatic NeoplasmsWatchful WaitingAgedHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingProspective Studiesactive surveillancemultiparametric MRIprostate cancer

Identifiers

PMID40305682
PMCPMC12334326

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.