Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37441340›Full record

ArticleEuropean urology open science2023

A Novel Risk Calculator Incorporating Clinical Parameters, Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography for Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification Before Transperineal Prostate Biopsy.

Brian D Kelly, Gideon Ptasznik, Matthew J Roberts, Paul Doan, Phillip Stricker, James Thompson, James Buteau, Kenneth Chen, Omar Alghazo, Jonathan S O'Brien and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European urology open science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. IntegratingCancers · 2025
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

17 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Brian D KellyDivision of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Gideon PtasznikDivision of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Matthew J RobertsRoyal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.
Paul DoanGarvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, Australia.
Phillip StrickerSt. Vincent's Prostate Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, Australia.
James ThompsonDepartment of Urology, St. George Hospital, Australia.
James ButeauDepartment of Molecular Imaging and Therapeutic Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Imaging and Prostate Cancer Theranostics and Imaging Centre of Excellence, Peter MacCallum Cancer, Melbourne, Australia.
Kenneth ChenDivision of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Omar AlghazoDivision of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Jonathan S O'BrienDivision of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Michael S HofmanDepartment of Molecular Imaging and Therapeutic Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Imaging and Prostate Cancer Theranostics and Imaging Centre of Excellence, Peter MacCallum Cancer, Melbourne, Australia.
Mark FrydenbergDepartment of Surgery, Monash University and Cabrini Institute, Cabrini Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Nathan LawrentschukDivision of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Dara LundonDivision of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Declan G MurphyDivision of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Louise EmmettDepartment of Theranostics and Nuclear Medicine, St. Vincent's Hospital Sydney, Darlinghurst, Australia.
Daniel MoonDivision of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
The University of Melbourne · AUPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AUCabrini Hospital · AUGarvan Institute of Medical Research · AURoyal Brisbane and Women's Hospital · AUSt George Hospital · AUSt Vincent's Hospital Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) can detect multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-invisible prostate tumours and improve the sensitivity of detection of prostate cancer (PCa) in comparison to mpMRI alone. Numerous risk calculators have been validated as tools for stratification of men at risk of being diagnosed with clinically significant (cs)PCa. Objective: To develop a novel risk calculator using clinical parameters and imaging parameters from mpMRI and PSMA PET/CT in a cohort of patients undergoing mpMRI and PSMA PET/CT before biopsy. Design setting and participants: A total of 291 men from the PRIMARY prospective trial underwent mpMRI and PSMA PET/CT before transperineal prostate biopsy with sampling of systematic and targeted cores. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Novel risk calculators were developed using multivariable logistic regression analysis to predict detection of overall PCa (International Society of Urological Pathology grade group [GG] ≥1) and csPCa (GG ≥2). The risk calculators were then compared with the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculator incorporating mpMRI (ERSPC-MRI). Resampling methods were used to evaluate the discrimination and calibration of the risk calculators and to perform decision curve analysis. Results and limitations: Age, prostate-specific antigen, prostate volume, and mpMRI Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System scores were included in the MRI risk calculator, resulting in area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values of 0.791 for overall PCa (GG ≥1) and 0.812 for csPCa (GG ≥2). Addition of the maximum standardised uptake value (SUVmax) on PSMA PET/CT for the prostate lesion, and of SUVmax for the mpMRI lesions for the MRI-PSMA risk calculator resulted in AUCs of 0.831 for overall PCa and 0.876 for csPCa (≥ISUP2).The ERSPC-MRI risk calculator had AUCs of 0.758 ( Conclusions: These novel risk calculators incorporate clinical and radiological parameters for stratification of men at risk of csPCa. The risk calculator including PSMA PET/CT data is superior to a calculator incorporating mpMRI data alone. Patient summary: We evaluated a new risk calculator that uses clinical information and results from two types of scan to predict the risk of clinically significant prostate cancer on prostate biopsy. This risk model can guide patients and clinicians in shared decision-making and may help in avoiding unnecessary prostate biopsies.

Indexed as

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imagingPositron emission tomographyProstate cancerProstate-specific membrane antigenRisk calculatorRisk modelRisk stratification

Identifiers

PMID37441340
PMCPMC10334234
OpenAlexW4379114214

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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 Socratic graph.