Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22240787›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2012

Risk profiles of prostate cancers identified from UK primary care using national referral guidelines.

H Serag, S Banerjee, K Saeb-Parsy, S Irving, K Wright, S Stearn, A Doble, V J Gnanapragasam

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07631806 (Prospective Validation of an AI-Assisted Multimodal Imaging-Pathology Fusion System for Precision Diagnosis and Biopsy Guidance in Patients With Suspected Prostate Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT07631806 active not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Prospective Validation of an AI-Assisted Multimodal Imaging-Pathology Fusion System for Precision Diagnosis and Biopsy Guidance in Patients With Suspected Prostate Cancer

TypeobservationalSponsorGuangxi Medical UniversityRan2026 to 2028Enrolled500ConditionsProstate Cancer With PSA Gray Zone
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Systematic review of clinical features of suspected prostate cancer in primary care.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2015
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Pixel Prostate Software as a Reliable Tool in Depicting Spatial Distribution and Determination of the Prostate Cancer Volume.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

8 authors.

H SeragDepartment of Urology, Addenbrookes Hospital, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0XZ, UK.
S Banerjee
K Saeb-Parsy
S Irving
K Wright
S Stearn
A Doble
V J Gnanapragasam

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveProstate cancer in the United Kingdom is mainly diagnosed from primary care referrals based on national guidelines published by the Department of Health. Here we investigated the characteristics of cancers detected through the use of these guidelines.

methodsA prospective two-centre study was established to assess men referred from the primary care based on the UK national guidelines.

resultsThe overall cancer detection rate was 43% (169 out of 397) with 15% (26 out of 169) of all cancers metastatic at presentation. Amongst 50-69-year-old men these rates were 34% (68 out of 200) and 15% (10 out of 68). Only 21% (25 out of 123) of men with local cancers had low-risk disease. In comparison to a historical cohort from 2001 (n=137) we found no overall differences in rates of metastatic disease, locally advanced tumours, or risk categories. Amongst 50-69-year-old men with local disease, however, we observed an increase in detection of low-risk cancers in a contemporary cohort (P=0.04). This was primarily because of the increased detection of low-stage organ-confined tumours in this group (P=0.02).

conclusionUse of the UK prostate cancer guidelines detects a high proportion of clinically significant cancers. Use of the guidelines does not seem to have led to an overall change in the clinical characteristics of presenting cancers. There may, however, be a specific benefit in detecting more low-risk disease in younger men.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingPractice Guidelines as TopicReferral and ConsultationAgedCohort StudiesEarly Detection of CancerEnglandHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasm StagingProspective StudiesProstatic NeoplasmsRegistriesRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID22240787
PMCPMC3273344

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.