Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16480669›Full record

ReviewCurrent urology reports2006

Tissue print micropeel: a new technique for mapping tumor invasion in prostate cancer.

Sandra M Gaston, Melissa P Upton

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current urology reports, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 89% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sandra M GastonBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA. sgaston@bidmc.harvard.edu
Melissa P Upton
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Because of widely adopted screening programs for early detection of prostate cancers, many patients who undergo radical prostatectomy have tumors that are not grossly evident, and the extent and distribution of the cancer in the gland can only be determined by a microscopic examination of the surgical specimen. Historically, one of the most important predictors of the quality of cancer control following surgical resection of a solid tumor is the absence of cancer at the surgical margins. Although the clinical significance of cancer at the margins of a radical prostatectomy specimen has been a source of controversy in recent years, surgical pathology assessment of radical prostatectomy margins remains an important part of prostate cancer clinical care. However, a comprehensive histopathologic review of every radical prostatectomy specimen is beyond the resources of most hospitals. Tissue print micropeel technologies, combined with appropriate markers, provide a new strategy that combines a relatively simple technique for sampling specimen margins with a method for obtaining molecular information about the cancer that can add to the macroscopic and microscopic anatomical findings. This new tissue printing approach for incorporating molecular markers into the assessment of radical prostatectomy margins is reviewed in this article.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorHumansMalePredictive Value of TestsProstateProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID16480669
OpenAlexW2055199469

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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 OpenQuestion graph.