ArticlePathology oncology research : POR2016
The Significance of Accurate Determination of Gleason Score for Therapeutic Options and Prognosis of Prostate Cancer.
Article in Pathology oncology research : POR, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of grading systems among pulmonary adenocarcinomas: architectural grade combined with STAS is superior to others - a single centre study.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Article
- RBIS as a prognostic biomarker for progression-free survival in prostate cancer: insights from bioinformatics and immune infiltration analysis.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Deep Learning Model for Predicting Lung Adenocarcinoma Recurrence from Whole Slide Images.Cancers · 2024Article
- Towards Digital Quantification of Ploidy from Pan-Cancer Digital Pathology Slides using Deep Learning.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- DIEANet: an attention model for histopathological image grading of lung adenocarcinoma based on dimensional information embedding.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- PET/CT-based deep learning grading signature to optimize surgical decisions for clinical stage I invasive lung adenocarcinoma and biologic basis under its prediction: a multicenter study.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- Exploring the intratumoral heterogeneity of DNA ploidy in prostate cancer.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2023Article
- Article
- Utility of Newly Proposed Grading System From International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer for Invasive Lung Adenocarcinoma.JTO clinical and research reports · 2021Article
- A critical evaluation of visual proportion of Gleason 4 and maximum cancer core length quantified by histopathologists.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- A Grading System for Invasive Pulmonary Adenocarcinoma: A Proposal From the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Pathology Committee.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2020Article
- RRBP1 is highly expressed in prostate cancer and correlates with prognosis.Cancer management and research · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Gleason score (GS) to date remains one of the most reliable prognostic predictors in prostate cancer (PCa). However, the majority of studies supporting its prognostic relevance were performed prior to its modification by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) in 2005. Furthermore, the combination of Gleason grading and nuclear/nucleolar subgrading (Helpap score) has been shown to essentially improve grading concordance between biopsy and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens. This prompted us to investigate the modified GS and combigrading (Gleason/Helpap score) in association with clinicopathological features, biochemical recurrence (BCR), and survival. Core needle biopsies and corresponding RP specimens from 580 patients diagnosed with PCa between 2005 and 2010 were evaluated. According to the modified GS, the comparison between biopsy and RP samples resulted in an upgrading from GS 6 to GS 7a and GS 7b in 65% and 19%, respectively. Combigrading further resulted in an upgrading from low grade (GS 6/2a) to intermediate grade PCa (GS 6/2b) in 11.1% and from intermediate grade (GS 6/2b) to high grade PCa (GS 7b/2b) in 22.6%. Overall, well-differentiated PCa (GS 6/2a) was detected in 2.8% of RP specimens, while intermediate grade (GS 6/2b and GS 7a/2b) and high grade cancers (≥ GS 7b) accounted for 39.5% and 57.4% of cases, respectively. At a mean follow-up of 3.9 years, BCR was observed in 17.6% of patients with intermediate (9.8%) or high grade PCa (30.2%), while PSA relapse did not occur in GS 6/2a PCa. In conclusion, adding nuclear/nucleolar subgrading to the modified GS allowed for a more accurate distinction between low and intermediate grade PCa, therefore offering a valuable tool for the identification of patients eligible for active surveillance (AS).
Indexed as
Identifiers
26563277What 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.