<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection>
<dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:invenio="http://invenio-software.org/elements/1.0" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd"><dc:identifier>doi:10.1016/j.euros.2023.03.013</dc:identifier><dc:language>eng</dc:language><dc:creator>Morote, Juan</dc:creator><dc:creator>Borque-Fernando, Ángel</dc:creator><dc:creator>Triquell, Marina</dc:creator><dc:creator>Campistol, Miriam</dc:creator><dc:creator>Servian, Pol</dc:creator><dc:creator>Abascal, José M.</dc:creator><dc:creator>Planas, Jacques</dc:creator><dc:creator>Méndez, Olga</dc:creator><dc:creator>Esteban, Luis M.</dc:creator><dc:creator>Trilla, Enrique</dc:creator><dc:title>Comparison of Rotterdam and Barcelona magnetic resonance imaging risk calculators for predicting clinically significant prostate cancer</dc:title><dc:identifier>ART-2023-133996</dc:identifier><dc:description>Background: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based risk calculators (MRI-RCs) individualise the likelihood of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) and improve candidate selection for prostate biopsy beyond the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS). Objective: To compare the Barcelona (BCN) and Rotterdam (ROT) MRI-RCs in an entire population and according to the PI-RADS categories. Design, setting, and participants: A prospective comparison of BCN- and ROT-RC in 946 men with suspected prostate cancer in whom systematic biopsy was performed, as well as target biopsies of PI-RADS ≥3 lesions. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Saved biopsies and undetected csPCa (grade group ≥2) were determined. Results and limitations: The csPCa detection was 40.8%. The median risks of csPCa from BCN- and ROT-RC were, respectively, 67.1% and 25% in men with csPCa, whereas 10.5% and 3% in those without csPCa (p &lt; 0.001). The areas under the curve were 0.856 and 0.844, respectively (p = 0.116). BCN-RC showed a higher net benefit and clinical utility over ROT-RC. Using appropriate thresholds, respectively, 75% and 80% of biopsies were needed to identify 50% of csPCa detected in men with PI-RADS &lt;3, whereas 35% and 21% of biopsies were saved, missing 10% of csPCa detected in men with PI-RADS 3. BCN-RC saved 15% of biopsies, missing 2% of csPCa in men with PI-RADS 4, whereas ROT-RC saved 10%, missing 6%. No RC saved biopsies without missing csPCa in men with PI-RADS 5. Conclusions: ROT-RC provided a lower and narrower range of csPCa probabilities than BCN-RC. BCN-RC showed a net benefit over ROT-RC in the entire population. However, BCN-RC was useful in men with PI-RADS 3 and 4, whereas ROT-RC was useful only in those with PI-RADS 3. No RC seemed to be helpful in men with negative MRI and PI-RADS 5.</dc:description><dc:date>2023</dc:date><dc:source>http://zaguan.unizar.es/record/126528</dc:source><dc:doi>10.1016/j.euros.2023.03.013</dc:doi><dc:identifier>http://zaguan.unizar.es/record/126528</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>oai:zaguan.unizar.es:126528</dc:identifier><dc:relation>info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/ISCIII/PI20/01666</dc:relation><dc:identifier.citation>European urology open science 53 (2023), 46-54</dc:identifier.citation><dc:rights>by-nc-nd</dc:rights><dc:rights>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/</dc:rights><dc:rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</dc:rights></dc:dc>

</collection>