Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22901577›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of urology2012

Association of [-2]proPSA with biopsy reclassification during active surveillance for prostate cancer.

Jeffrey J Tosoian, Stacy Loeb, Zhaoyong Feng, Sumit Isharwal, Patricia Landis, Debra J Elliot, Robert Veltri, Jonathan I Epstein, Alan W Partin, H Ballentine Carter and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of urology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Is Active Surveillance Too Active?Current urology reports · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Liquid biomarkers in active surveillance.World journal of urology · 2022
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Active surveillance for prostate cancer.Translational andrology and urology · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Beyond PSA: The Role of Prostate Health Index (phi).International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Review
  13. Review
  14. A novel predictor of clinical progression in patients on active surveillance for prostate cancer.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Biomarkers in active surveillance.Translational andrology and urology · 2018
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Jeffrey J TosoianDepartment of Urology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland 21287, USA.
Stacy Loeb
Zhaoyong Feng
Sumit Isharwal
Patricia Landis
Debra J Elliot
Robert Veltri
Jonathan I Epstein
Alan W Partin
H Ballentine Carter
Bruce Trock
Lori J Sokoll

Funding

TRANSGENIC MODELS FOR PROSTATE CANCER AND AUTOIMMUNITYP50CA058236 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI DENMEADE, SAMUEL R · 1992 to 2020
$43.9M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA058236NCI NIH HHS P50CA58236
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePrevious studies have suggested an association between [-2]proPSA expression and prostate cancer detection. Less is known about the usefulness of this marker in following patients with prostate cancer on active surveillance. Thus, we examined the relationship between [-2]proPSA and biopsy results in men enrolled in an active surveillance program. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn 167 men from our institutional active surveillance program we used Cox proportional hazards models to examine the relationship between [-2]proPSA and annual surveillance biopsy results. The outcome of interest was biopsy reclassification (Gleason score 7 or greater, more than 2 positive biopsy cores or more than 50% involvement of any core with cancer). We also examined the association of biopsy results with total prostate specific antigen, %fPSA, [-2]proPSA/%fPSA and the Beckman Coulter Prostate Health Index phi ([-2]proPSA/free prostate specific antigen) × (total prostate specific antigen)(½)).

resultsWhile on active surveillance (median time from diagnosis 4.3 years), 63 (37.7%) men demonstrated biopsy reclassification based on the previously mentioned criteria, including 28 (16.7%) of whom had reclassification based on Gleason score upgrading (Gleason score 7 or greater). Baseline and longitudinal %fPSA, %[-2]proPSA, [-2]proPSA/%fPSA and phi measurements were significantly associated with biopsy reclassification, and %[-2]proPSA and phi provided the greatest predictive accuracy for high grade cancer.

conclusionsIn men on active surveillance, measures based on [-2]proPSA such as phi appear to provide improved prediction of biopsy reclassification during followup. Additional validation is warranted to determine whether clinically useful thresholds can be defined, and to better characterize the role of %[-2]proPSA and phi in conjunction with other markers in monitoring patients enrolled in active surveillance.

Indexed as

Watchful WaitingAgedBiopsyEnzyme PrecursorsHumansMaleMiddle AgedProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsEnzyme PrecursorsProstate-Specific Antigen

Identifiers

PMID22901577
PMCPMC3976250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.