ReviewNature reviews. Urology2018
Historical and contemporary perspectives on cribriform morphology in prostate cancer.
Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of artificial intelligence diagnostic accuracy in prostate cancer histology identification and grading.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2023Pooled it
- Active surveillance should be considered for select men with Grade Group 2 prostate cancer.BMC urology · 2023Review
- Integrated analysis of single-cell and bulk RNA sequencing identifies a signature based on macrophage marker genes involved in prostate cancer prognosis and treatment responsiveness.Functional & integrative genomics · 2023Article
- Identification of ISG15 and ZFP36 as novel hypoxia- and immune-related gene signatures contributing to a new perspective for the treatment of prostate cancer by bioinformatics and experimental verification.Journal of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Evaluating the Outcomes of Active Surveillance in Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer: Prospective Results from the Canary PASS Cohort.The Journal of urology · 2022Article
- Prostate Pathology: What is New in the 2022 WHO Classification of Urinary and Male Genital Tumors?Pathologica · 2022Review
- Article
- Prostate cancer growth patterns beyond the Gleason score: entering a new era of comprehensive tumour grading.Histopathology · 2020Review
- Are we ready to include invasive cribriform and intraductal carcinoma into the prostate cancer grade grouping system?Translational andrology and urology · 2020Article
- Risk of Metastasis in Men with Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer Managed with Active Surveillance at a Tertiary Cancer Center.The Journal of urology · 2020Article
- Clinical outcome comparison of Grade Group 1 and Grade Group 2 prostate cancer with and without cribriform architecture at the time of radical prostatectomy.Histopathology · 2020Article
- Approaches to urinary detection of prostate cancer.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2019Review
- Concordance of cribriform architecture in matched prostate cancer biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens.Histopathology · 2019Article
- Diagnostic performance ofEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2019Article
- The influence of BRCA2 mutation on localized prostate cancer.Nature reviews. Urology · 2019Review
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Gleason scoring system is widely used for the grading and prognostication of prostate cancer. A Gleason pattern 4 subtype known as cribriform morphology has now been recognized as an aggressive and often lethal pattern of prostate cancer. The vast majority of published and ongoing prostate cancer studies still do not acknowledge the prognostic differences between various Gleason pattern 4 morphologies. As a result, current treatment recommendations are likely to be imprecise and not tailored towards patients who are most likely to die from the disease. Use of active surveillance for patients with Gleason score 3 + 4 prostate cancer has been suggested. However, the success of such paradigms would require cribriform morphology to be reported at the time of prostate biopsy, as patients harbouring such a pattern are poor candidates for surveillance. To date, only a limited number of studies have described the molecular alterations that occur in the cribriform morphological pattern. Further refinement of prostate cancer grading paradigms to distinguish cribriform from noncribriform Gleason pattern 4 is essential.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29713007What 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.