ArticleWorld journal of urology2015
Comparison of clinical outcomes between upgraded pathologic Gleason score 3 + 4 and non-upgraded 3 + 4 prostate cancer among patients who are candidates for active surveillance.
Article in World journal of urology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Outcomes of Grade Group 2 and 3 Prostate Cancer on Initial Versus Confirmatory Biopsy: Implications for Active Surveillance.European urology focus · 2023Review
- Cartilage oligomeric matrix protein in patients with osteoarthritis is independently associated with metastatic disease in prostate cancer.Oncotarget · 2019Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo clarify differences patients with pathological GS (pGS) 3 + 4 according to biopsy Gleason score (bGS) after radical prostatectomy (RP) among candidates for active surveillance.
methodsBetween January 2006 and June 2014, 619 patients who met Royal Marsden criteria and had a pGS 3 + 4 after RP were identified. Patients were stratified into two groups according to bGS: Group A (n = 430) with bGS (3 + 3) and Group B (n = 189) with bGS 7 (3 + 4). Pathological outcomes were compared between the two groups, and the impact of bGS on adverse pathological outcomes was analyzed by logistic regression and biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival compared by log-rank test and the Cox proportional hazards model.
resultsThe patients in Group B had a higher rate of extracapsular extension (ECE), seminal vesicle invasion and positive surgical margins than those in Group A (p < 0.001, p = 0.005, p = 0.046, respectively). In univariate and multivariate, bGS was significantly associated with ECE [odds ratio (OR) 2.615, p < 0.001; OR 1.769, p < 0.001]. In Kaplan-Meier analysis, BCR-free survival rate was higher in Group A than in Group B (log rank, p = 0.037). In multivariable Cox regression, maximum percentage of core involvement were strongly associated with BCR [hazard ratio (HR) 1.773 (1.248-2.519), p = 0.001].
conclusionspGS 3 + 4 was associated with heterogeneous pathologic and biochemical outcomes according to bGS. Patients with pGS 3 + 4 upgraded from bGS 3 + 3 had more favorable pathological outcomes and biochemical survival outcomes than those with bGS 3 + 4.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25809876What 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.