ArticleClinical biochemistry2013
Association of transcript levels of 10 established or candidate-biomarker gene targets with cancerous versus non-cancerous prostate tissue from radical prostatectomy specimens.
Article in Clinical biochemistry, 2013. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-Coding RNA Biomarkers in Prostate Cancer: Evidence Mapping and In Silico Characterization.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Differential Protein-Coding Gene Expression Profile in Patients with Prostate Cancer.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Genetic signature of prostate cancer mouse models resistant to optimized hK2 targeted α-particle therapy.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020Article
- Article
- Altered PCA3 and TMPRSS2-ERG expression in histologically benign regions of cancerous prostates: a systematic, quantitative mRNA analysis in five prostates.BMC urology · 2015Article
- 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
11 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe benefits of PSA (prostate specific antigen)-testing in prostate cancer remain controversial with a consequential need for validation of additional biomarkers. We used highly standardized reverse-transcription (RT)-PCR assays to compare transcript levels of 10 candidate cancer marker genes - BMP6, FGF-8b, KLK2, KLK3, KLK4, KLK15, MSMB, PCA3, PSCA and Trpm8 - in carefully ascertained non-cancerous versus cancerous prostate tissue from patients with clinically localized prostate cancer treated by radical prostatectomy. DESIGN AND
methodsTotal RNA was isolated from fresh frozen prostate tissue procured immediately after resection from two separate areas in each of 87 radical prostatectomy specimens. Subsequent histopathological assessment classified 86 samples as cancerous and 88 as histologically benign prostate tissue. Variation in total RNA recovery was accounted for by using external and internal standards and enabled us to measure transcript levels by RT-PCR in a highly quantitative manner.
resultsOf the ten genes, there were significantly higher levels only of one of the less abundant transcripts, PCA3, in cancerous versus non-cancerous prostate tissue whereas PSCA mRNA levels were significantly lower in cancerous versus histologically benign tissue. Advanced pathologic stage was associated with significantly higher expression of KLK15 and PCA3 mRNAs. Median transcript levels of the most abundantly expressed genes (i.e. MSMB, KLK3, KLK4 and KLK2) in prostate tissue were up to 10(5)-fold higher than those of other gene targets.
conclusionsPCA3 expression was associated with advanced pathological stage but the magnitude of overexpression of PCA3 in cancerous versus non-cancerous prostate tissue was modest compared to previously reported data.
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.