ArticleJournal of clinical urology2016
Novel concepts for risk stratification in prostate cancer.
Article in Journal of clinical urology, 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.
- Early biomarkers of extracapsular extension of prostate cancer using MRI-derived semantic features.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2022Article
- Prostate Cancer Survival by Risk and Other Prognostic Factors in Mallorca, Spain.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- The use of hyperpolarisedBritish journal of cancer · 2021Review
- Identification and Validation of Leucine-rich α-2-glycoprotein 1 as a Noninvasive Biomarker for Improved Precision in Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification.European urology open science · 2020Article
- Prostate Cancer Cellular Uptake of Ternary Titanate Nanotubes/CuFeInternational journal of nanomedicine · 2020Article
- Transcriptome Analysis Identifies Piwi-Interacting RNAs as Prognostic Markers for Recurrence of Prostate Cancer.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Article
- Construction of a set of novel and robust gene expression signatures predicting prostate cancer recurrence.Molecular oncology · 2018Article
- Prostate cancer: unmet clinical needs and RAD9 as a candidate biomarker for patient management.Translational cancer research · 2018Article
- Overexpression of MUC1 and Genomic Alterations in Its Network Associate with Prostate Cancer Progression.Neoplasia (New York, N.Y.) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since Partin introduced the analysis of prostate-specific antigen, clinical T-stage and Gleason scores to estimate the risk of progression in men with localised prostate cancer, our understanding of factors that modify this risk has changed drastically. There are now multiple risk stratification tools available, including look-up tables, risk stratification/classification analyses, regression-tree analyses, nomograms and artificial neural networks. Concurrently, descriptions of novel biopsy strategies, imaging modalities and biomarkers are frequently published with the aim of improving risk stratification. With an abundance of new information available, incorporating advances into clinical practice can be confusing. This article aims to outline the major novel concepts in prostate cancer risk stratification for men with biopsy confirmed prostate cancer. We will detail which of these novel techniques and tools are likely to be adopted to aid treatment decisions and enable more accurate post-diagnosis, pretreatment risk stratification.
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.