Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41247538›Full record

ArticleEJNMMI research2025

Local staging of de novo prostate cancer using mpMRI, PSMA-PET and PSMA-PET/mpMRI - a comparative study.

Josefine Grefve, Sara N Strandberg, Joakim Jonsson, Angsana Keeratijarut Lindberg, Erik Nilsson, Anders Bergh, Karin Söderkvist, Camilla Thellenberg Karlsson, Lennart Nedar, Vibeke Berg Løgager and 8 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in EJNMMI research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

18 authors.

Josefine GrefveDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden. josefine.grefve@umu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3488-7784
Sara N StrandbergDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Diagnostic Radiology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Joakim JonssonDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Angsana Keeratijarut LindbergDepartment of Medical Biosciences, Pathology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Erik NilssonDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Anders BerghDepartment of Medical Biosciences, Pathology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Karin SöderkvistDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Oncology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Camilla Thellenberg KarlssonDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Oncology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Lennart NedarDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Hospital Physics, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Vibeke Berg LøgagerDepartment of Radiology, Copenhagen University Hospital in Herlev, Herlev, Denmark.
Erik ThimanssonDepartment of Translational Medicine, Diagnostic Radiology, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
Elin TrägårdhDepartment of Radiology, Helsingborg Hospital, Helsingborg, Sweden.
Johan BengtssonDepartment of Medical Imaging and Physiology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Erland HvittfeldtDepartment of Translational Medicine, Wallenberg Centre for Molecular Medicine, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
Jan AxelssonDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Tufve NyholmDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Katrine RiklundDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Diagnostic Radiology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Kristina SandgrenDepartment of Diagnostics and Intervention, Radiation Physics, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate diagnosis and staging are essential for optimal treatment planning of prostate cancer. By combining functional and anatomical imaging, PSMA-PET/mpMRI offers a potential to improve lesion detection and enhance staging accuracy. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of lesion detection and local staging of prostate cancer using combined PSMA-PET/mpMRI compared to standalone mpMRI or PSMA-PET.

resultsFifty-five patients with intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer scheduled for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy were included. All patients underwent [

conclusionsPSMA-PET/mpMRI provided higher and a more consistent performance in localized prostate cancer detection and staging without increasing false-positive findings.

Identifiers

PMID41247538
PMCPMC12623556

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.