Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKasivisvanathan, Veeru
dc.contributor.authorWai-Shun Chan, Vinson
dc.contributor.authorClement, Keiran D
dc.contributor.authorLevis, Brooke
dc.contributor.authorNg, Alexander
dc.contributor.authorAsif, Aqua
dc.contributor.authorHaider, Masoom A
dc.contributor.authorEmberton, Mark
dc.contributor.authorPond, Gregory R
dc.contributor.authorAgarwal, Ridhi
dc.contributor.authorScandrett, Katie
dc.contributor.authorTakwoingi, Yemisi
dc.contributor.authorKlotz, Laurence
dc.contributor.authorMoore, Caroline M
dc.date.accessioned2024-10-03T12:11:00Z
dc.date.available2024-10-03T12:11:00Z
dc.date.issued2024-09-03
dc.identifier.citationKasivisvanathan V, Wai-Shun Chan V, Clement KD, Levis B, Ng A, Asif A, Haider MA, Emberton M, Pond GR, Agarwal R, Scandrett K, Takwoingi Y, Klotz L, Moore CM; VISION Study Collaborators. VISION: An Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis of Randomised Trials Comparing Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy with Standard Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Biopsy in the Detection of Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol. 2024 Sep 3:S0302-2838(24)02559-4. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.08.022. Epub ahead of printen_US
dc.identifier.issn0302-2838
dc.identifier.eissn1873-7560
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.eururo.2024.08.022
dc.identifier.pmid39232979
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14200/6025
dc.description.abstractBackground and objective: The PRECISION and PRECISE trials compared magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy (MRI ± TB) with the standard transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided biopsy for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). PRECISION demonstrated superiority of MRI ± TB over TRUS guided biopsy, while PRECISE demonstrated noninferiority. The VISION study is a planned individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) comparing MRI ± TB with TRUS guided biopsy for csPCa diagnosis. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central of Registered Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched on the November 12, 2023 for randomised controlled trials of biopsy-naïve patients with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer undergoing MRI or standard TRUS. Studies were included if its participants with suspicious MRI underwent targeted biopsy alone and those with nonsuspicious lesion avoided biopsy. The primary outcome is the proportion of men diagnosed with csPCa (Gleason ≥3 + 4). Key findings and limitations: Two studies, PRECISION and PRECISE (953 patients), were included in the IPDMA. In the MRI ± TB arm, 32.2% of patients avoided biopsy due to nonsuspicious MRI. MRI ± TB detected 8.7 percentage points (36.3% vs 27.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.8-14.6, p = 0.004) more csPCa than TRUS biopsy and 12.3 percentage points (9.6% vs 21.9%; 95% CI 7.8-16.9, p < 0.001) less clinically insignificant prostate cancer (cisPCa; Gleason 3 + 3). The overall risk of bias for the included studies were found to be low after assessment using the QUADAS-2, QUADAS-C, and ROB 2.0 tools. Conclusions and clinical implications: The MRI ± TB pathway is superior to TRUS biopsy in detecting csPCa and avoiding the diagnosis of cisPCa. MRI should be included in the standard of care pathway for prostate cancer diagnosis.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03022838en_US
dc.rightsCopyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
dc.subjectSurgeryen_US
dc.subjectOncology. Pathology.en_US
dc.titleVISION : an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised trials comparing magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy with standard transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy in the detection of prostate canceren_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.source.journaltitleEuropean Urologyen_US
rioxxterms.versionNAen_US
oa.grant.openaccessnaen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Publisher version

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record