The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Negative Predictive Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Era: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
CONTEXT Prebiopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is increasingly used in prostate cancer diagnosis. The reported negative predictive value (NPV) of mpMRI is used by some clinicians to aid in decision making about whether or not to proceed to biopsy. OBJECTIVE We aim to perform a contemporary systematic review that reflects the latest literature on optimal mpMRI techniques and scoring systems to update the NPV of mpMRI for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION We conducted a systematic literature search and included studies from 2016 to September 4, 2019, which assessed the NPV of mpMRI for csPCa, using biopsy or clinical follow-up as the reference standard. To ensure that studies included in this analysis reflect contemporary practice, we only included studies in which mpMRI findings were interpreted according to the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) or similar Likert grading system. We define negative mpMRI as either (1) PIRADS/Likert 1-2 or (2) PIRADS/Likert 1-3; csPCa was defined as either (1) Gleason grade group ≥2 or (2) Gleason grade group ≥3. We calculated NPV separately for each combination of negative mpMRI and csPCa. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS A total of 42 studies with 7321 patients met our inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. Using definition (1) for negative mpMRI and csPCa, the pooled NPV for biopsy-naïve men was 90.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 88.1-93.1%). When defining csPCa using definition (2), the NPV for csPCa was 97.1% (95% CI 94.9-98.7%). Calculation of the pooled NPV using definition (2) for negative mpMRI and definition (1) for csPCa yielded the following: 86.8% (95% CI 80.1-92.4%). Using definition (2) for both negative mpMRI and csPCa, the pooled NPV from two studies was 96.1% (95% CI 93.4-98.2%). CONCLUSIONS Multiparametric MRI of the prostate is generally an accurate test for ruling out csPCa. However, we observed heterogeneity in the NPV estimates, and local institutional data should form the basis of decision making if available. PATIENT SUMMARY The negative predictive values should assist in decision making for clinicians considering not proceeding to biopsy in men with elevated age-specific prostate-specific antigen and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging reported as negative (or equivocal) on Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System/Likert scoring. Some 7-10% of men, depending on the setting, will miss a diagnosis of clinically significant cancer if they do not proceed to biopsy. Given the institutional variation in results, it is of upmost importance to base decision making on local data if available.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies
Whiting, P. F., Rutjes, A. W. S., Westwood, M. E., Mallett, S., Deeks, J. J., Reitsma, J. B., Leeflang, M. M. G., Sterne, J. A. C., Bossuyt, P. M. M., & the QUADAS-2 Group* (2011) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009 · Cited by 14,199
Ahmed, H. U., El-Shater Bosaily, A., Brown, L. C., Gabe, R., Kaplan, R., Parmar, M. K., Collaco-Moraes, Y., Ward, K., Hindley, R. G., Freeman, A., et al. (2017) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(16)32401-1 · Cited by 3,284
Self-citationRouvière, O., Puech, P., Renard-Penna, R., Claudon, M., Roy, C., Mège-Lechevallier, F., Decaussin-Petrucci, M., Dubreuil-Chambardel, M., Magaud, L., Remontet, L., et al. (2019) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(18)30569-2 · Cited by 1,095
van der Leest, M., Cornel, E., Israël, B., Hendriks, R., Padhani, A. R., Hoogenboom, M., Zamecnik, P., Bakker, D., Setiasti, A. Y., Veltman, J., et al. (2019) · European Urology · doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.023 · Cited by 777
Drost, F.-J. H., Osses, D. F., Nieboer, D., Steyerberg, E. W., Bangma, C. H., Roobol, M. J., & Schoots, I. G. (2019) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd012663.pub2 · Cited by 640
Filson, C. P., Natarajan, S., Margolis, D. J. A., Huang, J., Lieu, P., Dorey, F. J., Reiter, R. E., & Marks, L. S. (2016) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.29874 · Cited by 406
Moldovan, P. C., Van den Broeck, T., Sylvester, R., Marconi, L., Bellmunt, J., van den Bergh, R. C. N., Bolla, M., Briers, E., Cumberbatch, M. G., Fossati, N., et al. (2017) · European Urology · doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2017.02.026 · Cited by 391
Self-citationProstate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Interpretation Varies Substantially Across Radiologists
Sonn, G. A., Fan, R. E., Ghanouni, P., Wang, N. N., Brooks, J. D., Loening, A. M., Daniel, B. L., To’o, K. J., Thong, A. E., & Leppert, J. T. (2019) · European Urology Focus · doi:10.1016/j.euf.2017.11.010 · Cited by 278
Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer: What's Next?
Panebianco, V., Barchetti, G., Simone, G., Del Monte, M., Ciardi, A., Grompone, M. D., Campa, R., Indino, E. L., Barchetti, F., Sciarra, A., et al. (2018) · European Urology · doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2018.03.007 · Cited by 186
Simmons, L. A. M., Kanthabalan, A., Arya, M., Briggs, T. P., Barratt, D. C., Charman, S. C., Freeman, A., Gelister, J. S. K., Hawkes, D. J., Hu, Y., et al. (2017) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/bjc.2017.57 · Cited by 110
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Sathianathen, N. J., Omer, A., Harriss, E., Davies, L., Kasivisvanathan, V., Punwani, S., Moore, C. M., Kastner, C., Barrett, T., Van Den Bergh, R. C., Eddy, B. A., Gleeson, F., Macpherson, R., Bryant, R. J., Catto, J. W. F., Murphy, D. G., Hamdy, F. C., Ahmed, H. U., & Lamb, A. D.
- Venue
- European Urology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-09
- Volume
- 78
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 402-414
- ISSN
- 0302-2838 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3027017122
- Cited by
- 346
- References
- 14
- FWCI
- 9.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Negative Predictive Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Era: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.03.048
- The paper
- Sathianathen, N. J., Omer, A., Harriss, E., Davies, L., Kasivisvanathan, V., Punwani, S., Moore, C. M., Kastner, C., Barrett, T., Van Den Bergh, R. C., Eddy, B. A., Gleeson, F., Macpherson, R., Bryant, R. J., Catto, J. W. F., Murphy, D. G., Hamdy, F. C., Ahmed, H. U., & Lamb, A. D. (2020). Negative Predictive Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Era: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. European Urology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.03.048
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.