Deniffel, Dominik
Perlis, Nathan
Ghai, Sangeet
Girgis, Stephanie
Healy, Gerard M.
Fleshner, Neil
Hamilton, Robert
Kulkarni, Girish
Toi, Ants
van der Kwast, Theodorus
Zlotta, Alexandre
Finelli, Antonio
Haider, Masoom A. http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7165-8315
Funding for this research was provided by:
Ontario Institute for Cancer Research
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Fellowship DE 3207/1-1])
Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (Clinical Research Scholarship)
Article History
Received: 16 January 2022
Revised: 20 March 2022
Accepted: 18 April 2022
First Online: 4 May 2022
Declarations
: Parts of this work were presented at the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) 2021 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting (Abstract GU04-A2).
: The scientific guarantor of this publication is Masoom A. Haider.
: The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.
: Dr. Dominik Deniffel has extensive expertise in statistics.
: Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board.
: Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.
: Three hundred twenty-two of the 745 patients were included in previous reports: a multi-institutional study on the positive predictive value of PI-RADS [1] and a study comparing risk stratification strategies prior to biopsy referral [2].References:1.Westphalen AC, McCulloch CE, Anaokar JM, et al (2020) Variability of the positive predictive value of PI-RADS for prostate MRI across 26 centers: experience of the Society of Abdominal Radiology prostate cancer disease-focused panel. Radiology 296:76–84. ExternalRef removed2.Deniffel D, Healy GM, Dong X, et al (2021) Avoiding unnecessary biopsy: MRI-based risk models versus a PI-RADS and PSA density strategy for clinically significant prostate cancer. Radiology 204112. ExternalRef removed
: • retrospective• diagnostic or prognostic study• performed at one institution