Trial reportProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2026
Evaluating PI-RADS lesions and clinically significant prostate cancer in Black and Asian men: a PREVENT randomized clinical trial secondary analysis.
Trial report in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04843566 (Evaluation of Transperineal Biopsy Under Local Anesthesia, a Novel Approach to Decrease Post-Biopsy Infections and Improve Cancer Detection), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Evaluation of Transperineal Biopsy Under Local Anesthesia, a Novel Approach to Decrease Post-Biopsy Infections and Improve Cancer Detection
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Is Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System equally predictive across racial groups? A narrative review of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging performance in Black versus White men.Prostate international · 2026Review
- Omitting biopsy in Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System 3? The role of Stockholm3 and prostate-specific antigen density findings from a prospective Swiss non-referral cohort.Prostate international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeNon-White patients are poorly represented in prostate cancer trials. MRI PI-RADS scoring was developed in primarily White populations, but prostate cancer differs in non-White men. We aimed to explore differences in PI-RADS calibration for Asian and Black men. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis is a secondary analysis of PREVENT, a multi-institutional study of infection rates for transrectal vs. transperineal biopsy. We compared cancer detection for self-identifying Asian and Black men. We compared detection rates on a per-person basis, stratified by index PI-RADS lesion, to White men, using Fisher's exact and logistic regression.
resultsOf 665/752 trial patients with PI-RADS 3-5 lesions, 88 (13%) were Black and 36 (6%) were Asian. Black men were younger at diagnosis with increased rates of overall (70% vs. 43%%, P = 0.004) and clinically significant prostate cancer (60% vs. 27%, P = 0.003) and Asian men had decreased rates of overall (0% vs. 47%, P = 0.004) and clinically significant prostate cancer (0% vs. 27%, P = 0.003) in PI-RADS 3 lesions compared to White men. On multivariable regression, Black men with PI-RADS 3/4 lesions had higher odds of overall (OR 1.17, P = 0.009) and clinically significant prostate cancer (OR 1.20, P = 0.004) and Asian men had lower odds of overall (OR 0.79, P = 0.01) but not clinically significant prostate cancer (OR 0.94, P = 0.5).
conclusionsBlack men with PI-RADS 3/4 lesions had 20% higher odds of clinically significant prostate cancer than White men while all PI-RADS 3 lesions in Asian men were negative. These findings suggest PI-RADS may require differential interpretation when assessing prostate cancer risk in non-White men.
trial registrationRegistered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04843566 , https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04843566 ).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.