ReviewNature reviews. Urology2011
Biomarker research in prostate cancer--towards utility, not futility.
Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genetic variants in epithelial-mesenchymal transition genes as predictors of clinical outcomes in localized prostate cancer.Carcinogenesis · 2020Article
- Integrating biomarkers across omic platforms: an approach to improve stratification of patients with indolent and aggressive prostate cancer.Molecular oncology · 2018Article
- Automated 3D-Printed Microfluidic Array for Rapid Nanomaterial-Enhanced Detection of Multiple Proteins.Analytical chemistry · 2018Article
- Targeting Fibronectin for Cancer Imaging and Therapy.Journal of materials chemistry. B · 2017Article
- Prostate Cancer Detection Using Composite Impedance Metric.IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2016Article
- Prediction of prostate cancer recurrence using quantitative phase imaging: Validation on a general population.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- The accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer staging: a single-institution experience.Irish journal of medical science · 2015Article
- John Fitzpatrick: an appreciation.The oncologist · 2015Article
- Urinary aHGF, IGFBP3 and OPN as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for prostate cancer.Biomarkers in medicine · 2013Article
- Evaluation of prediction models for the staging of prostate cancer.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2013Article
- Current status of biomarkers for prostate cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2013Review
- Aberrant PSA glycosylation--a sweet predictor of prostate cancer.Nature reviews. Urology · 2013Review
- Highly efficient binding of paramagnetic beads bioconjugated with 100,000 or more antibodies to protein-coated surfaces.Analytical chemistry · 2012Article
- Patented prostate cancer biomarkers.Nature reviews. Urology · 2012Review
- Markers of field cancerization: proposed clinical applications in prostate biopsies.Prostate cancer · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The identification of an appropriate clinical question is critical for any biomarker project. Despite rapid advances in technology, few biomarkers have been forthcoming for prostate cancer. This could be because the clinical questions under investigation have not actually originated from clinical practice. These clinical questions are difficult to identify in the complex and heterogeneous pathogenesis of prostate cancer. In this Review, we have developed a prostate cancer 'roadmap' to identify the aspects of prostate cancer that may be amenable to biomarker discovery and serve as a guide for future projects in prostate cancer biomarker research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21394176What 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.