ArticleTumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine2016
Use of two gene panels for prostate cancer diagnosis and patient risk stratification.
Article in Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differential Protein-Coding Gene Expression Profile in Patients with Prostate Cancer.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Systematic review and integrated analysis of prognostic gene signatures for prostate cancer patients.Discover oncology · 2023Article
- Urinary endogenous peptides as biomarkers for prostate cancer.Oncology letters · 2023Article
- KLK3 SNP-SNP interactions for prediction of prostate cancer aggressiveness.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- A 23-Gene Classifier urine test for prostate cancer prognosis.Clinical and translational medicine · 2021Article
- Non-invasive Urine Test for Molecular Classification of Clinical Significance in Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer Patients.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- Development and validation of a 25-Gene Panel urine test for prostate cancer diagnosis and potential treatment follow-up.BMC medicine · 2020Article
- Establishing a Urine-Based Biomarker Assay for Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2020Article
- Tissue-Based MicroRNAs as Predictors of Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy: What Can We Learn from Past Studies?International journal of molecular sciences · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Currently, no ideal prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostic or prognostic test is available due to the lack of biomarkers with high sensitivity and specificity. There is an unmet medical need to develop combinations of multiple biomarkers which may have higher accuracy in detection of PCa and stratification of aggressive and indolent cancer patients. The aim of this study was to test two biomarker gene panels in distinguishing PCa from benign prostate and high-risk, aggressive PCa from low-risk, indolent PCa, respectively. We identified a five-gene panel that can be used to distinguish PCa from benign prostate. The messenger RNA (mRNA) expression signature of the five genes was determined in 144 PCa and benign prostate specimens from prostatectomy. We showed that the five-gene panel distinguished PCa from benign prostate with sensitivity of 96.59 %, specificity of 92.86 %, and area under the curve (AUC) of 0.992 (p < 0.0001). The five-gene panel was further validated in a 137 specimen cohort and showed sensitivity of 84.62 %, specificity of 91.84 %, and AUC of 0.942 (p < 0.0001). To define subtypes of PCa for treatment guidance, we examined mRNA expression signature of an eight-gene panel in 87 PCa specimens from prostatectomy. The signature of the eight-gene panel was able to distinguish aggressive PCa (Gleason score >6) from indolent PCa (Gleason score ≤6) with sensitivity of 90.28 %, specificity of 80.00 %, and AUC of 0.967 (p < 0.0001). This panel was further validated in a 158 specimen cohort and showed significant difference between aggressive PCa and indolent PCa with sensitivity of 92.57 %, specificity of 70.00 %, and AUC of 0.962 (p < 0.0001). Our findings in assessing multiple biomarkers in combination may provide new tools to detect PCa and distinguish aggressive and indolent PCa for precision and personalized treatment. The two biomarker panels may be used in clinical settings for accurate PCa diagnosis and patient risk stratification for biomarker-guided treatment.
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.