ArticleJournal of clinical pathology2007
Periacinar retraction clefting in proliferative prostatic atrophy and prostatic adenocarcinoma.
Article in Journal of clinical pathology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prostate cancer stroma: an important factor in cancer growth and progression.Bosnian journal of basic medical sciences · 2015Review
- Periacinar retraction clefting and d2-40 expression in prostatic adenocarcinoma.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2012Article
- Peritumoral retraction clefting correlates with advanced stage squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo evaluate the presence and extent of periacinar retraction clefting in proliferative prostatic atrophy and carcinoma in radical prostatectomy specimens.
methodsAtrophic foci and neoplastic glands were analysed in specimens from 50 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy. Analysed atrophic glands were classified in two main groups, proliferative atrophy (PA) and proliferative inflammatory atrophy (PIA); each group was subclassified into simple atrophy (SA) and postatrophic hyperplasia (PAH). According to the presence and extent of periacinar retraction clefting, atrophic and neoplastic glands were classified as: group 1, glands without clefts or with clefts affecting <or=50% of gland circumference; group 2, glands with clefts that affected >50% of the circumference in <50% of examined glands; and group 3, glands with clefts that affected >50% of the circumference in >or=50% of examined glands.
resultsForty-four (88.0%) atrophic foci were without periacinar clefts or clefts were present in less than half of the gland circumference (group 1). In 6 (12.0%), atrophic foci clefts affected >50% of gland circumference (groups 2 and 3). Forty-five (90.0%) carcinomas were with clefts which affected more than 50% of gland circumference (groups 2 and 3); and in five carcinomas only, clefts were not found or affected <50% of gland circumference (group 1).
conclusionResults indicate that periacinar retraction clefting represents a reliable criterion in differential diagnosis between proliferative atrophy and carcinoma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.