ArticleThe Prostate2026
A Pilot Study of
Article in The Prostate, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPSMA-PET offers an opportunity to reduce the mischaracterization of disease in active surveillance (AS) and focal therapy (FT) candidates. We describe the results of a pilot clinical trial evaluating
methodsWe enrolled 20 men with low risk or favorable intermediate risk prostate cancer and Decipher score ≥ 0.45 diagnosed after an MRI-informed prostate biopsy. All patients underwent PSMA-PET/MRI followed by either PET/MRI-guided biopsy or radical prostatectomy within 90 days. The outcome of interest was detection of grade group (GG) 3-5 disease, seminal vesicle invasion (pT3b), or lymph node involvement (pN1). A detection rate of 15% for this outcome was considered clinically significant. Management decisions and confidence in those decisions were recorded before and after the scan using a 3-point scale. A paired t-test was performed to compare the change in confidence decisions.
resultsAt enrollment, 17 patients (85%) had favorable intermediate risk and 3 (15%) had low risk prostate cancer. The median Decipher score was 0.58 (IQR 0.49-0.65). Five patients (25%) demonstrated the outcome of interest based on upgrading alone. None had upstaging to pT3b or pN1. Major changes in management plan occurred in 7 patients (35%). Average confidence in decisions improved from moderate (2.05) to high (2.80) after the scan (p < 0.001).
conclusions
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.