ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2026
Diagnostic performance of transrectal ultrasound elastography integrated with clinical indicators in prostate cancer evaluation.
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most diagnosed type of cancer in men worldwide. Conventional ultrasound-guided systematic prostate biopsies demonstrate limited accuracy and a high false-negative rate, which may increase procedural risks and potential complications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) combined with shear wave elastography (SWE) and clinical indicators for the detection of PCa. Methods: A total of 375 patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels were enrolled. Patients' age, prostate stiffness values, PSA density (PSAD), PSA levels, and prostate volume (PV) were analyzed. Diagnostic performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis to determine optimal cut-off values and simple models. Additionally, the diagnostic performance of different parameters for PCa was evaluated at varying PSA levels. Results: In all patients, PSAD demonstrated superior diagnostic performance compared to age, PSA, PV, and SWE alone. Optimal threshold values for PSAD and SWE were 0.62 ng/mL Conclusions: The cutoff value of SWE is dependent on their serum PSA level, and SWE yields higher diagnostic efficacy at PSA levels exceeding 20 ng/mL. The combination of SWE + PSAD shows better diagnostic efficacy for PCa than other parameters, while integrating imaging with clinical data can further enhance the diagnostic yield.
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.