ArticleYonsei medical journal2012
Are clinically insignificant prostate cancers really insignificant among Korean men?
Article in Yonsei medical journal, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pathological Characteristics of Prostate Cancer in Men Aged < 50 Years Treated with Radical Prostatectomy: a Multi-Centre Study in Korea.Journal of Korean medical science · 2019Article
- Clinical significance of single microscopic focus of adenocarcinoma at prostate biopsy.Prostate international · 2015Article
- Is small prostate volume a predictor of Gleason score upgrading after radical prostatectomy?Yonsei medical journal · 2013Observational
- Can microfocal prostate cancer be regarded as low-risk prostate cancer?Prostate international · 2013Article
- Prostate cancer in East Asia: evolving trend over the last decade.Asian journal of andrologyReview
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to determine whether 12 core-extended biopsies of the prostate could predict insignificant prostate cancer (IPCa) in Koreans reliably enough to recommend active surveillance. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwo hundred and ninety-seven patients who underwent radical prostatectomy after 12 core-extended prostate biopsies were retrospectively reviewed. 38 cases (12.8%) were shown to be IPCa.
resultsThe average age was 65.2 years, serum PSA was 5.49 ng/dL, and the PSA density was 0.11. The Gleason scores (GS) were 6 (3+3) in 31, 5 (3+2) in 4, and 4 (2+2) in 3. After radical prostatectomy, higher GS was given in 16 (42.1%), whereas lower GS was given in 1 case (2.6%), as compared with the GS obtained from biopsy. 11 (28.9%) had GS of 7 (3+4) and 5 (13.2%) had GS of 7 (4+3). 6 in GS 7 (4+3) and 1 in GS 7 (3+4) showed prostate capsule invasion and 1 in GS 7 (4+3) had seminal vesicle invasion. Prostate capsule invasion was observed in 1 with GS 6 (3+3). The rate of inaccuracy of the contemporary Epstein criteria was 42.1%. Only PSA density was a reliable indicator of clinically IPCa (odds ratio=1.384, 95% CI, 1.103 to 2.091).
conclusionDiagnosis of IPCa from a prostate biopsy underestimated the true nature of prostate cancer in as many as 42.1% of Koreans.
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.