ArticlePathology oncology research : POR2012
Improving the reproducibility of the Gleason scores in small foci of prostate cancer--suggestion of diagnostic criteria for glandular fusion.
Article in Pathology oncology research : POR, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Applications of Topological Data Analysis in Oncology.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2021Review
- Persistent Homology for the Quantitative Evaluation of Architectural Features in Prostate Cancer Histology.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Review
- Modernizing the diagnostic and decision-making pathway for prostate cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2014Article
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High upgrading rates of Gleason score 6 to 7 carcinomas between biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens may be produced by change of fused glands of pattern 3 to pattern 4. Therefore, inter-observer reproducibility of fused and non-fused glands in biopsy specimens was analysed. Images of H&E stained slides of glands of carcinomas with Gleason score 6 and 7 (3 + 4) with and without glandular fusions with different lens magnification were analysed by 4 specialized genitourinary pathologists and 3 non-specialized pathologists. The definition of glandular fusion was a complete lack of any stromal fibres between a minimum of two glands and only one line of nuclei within the area of fusion. Overall agreement and inter-observer reproducibility of fused versus non-fused glands of non- and uro-pathologically specialized pathologists were lower in lens magnification of 50× in contrast to 200×. The inter-observer reproducibility of fused glands by specialized observer was higher than that of non-specialized pathologists. The results support the importance of strict but practicable criteria for the diagnosis of fused tumor glands in order to decrease the interobserver variability of Gleason scores, particularly in non-specialised pathologists.
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.