ArticleAsian journal of andrology
Prostate cancer upgrading or downgrading of biopsy Gleason scores at radical prostatectomy: prediction of "regression to the mean" using routine clinical features with correlating biochemical relapse rates.
Article in Asian journal of andrology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The impact of surgical downgrading on prostate cancer recurrence: systematic review and analysis of a multiethnic population.World journal of urology · 2022Pooled it
- Clinicopathologic profile of Filipino men with low-risk prostate cancer and predictors of unfavorable pathology at radical prostatectomy.Prostate international · 2026Article
- Underestimation of Prostate Cancer Grade in Transperineal Fusion Biopsy and Its Predictive Factors: Correlation of Biopsy Findings with Post-Da Vinci Radical Prostatectomy Specimens.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- The role of PSMA PET/CT in predicting downgrading in patients with Gleason score 4+4 prostate cancer in prostate biopsy.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- Catalyzing Precision Medicine: Artificial Intelligence Advancements in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Management.Cancers · 2024Review
- Article
- Targeted biopsy added to systematic biopsy improves cancer detection in prostate cancer screening.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2024Article
- Diffusion kurtosis imaging and standard diffusion imaging in the magnetic resonance imaging assessment of prostate cancer.Gland surgery · 2023Review
- MRI-Guided Targeted and Systematic Prostate Biopsies as Prognostic Indicators for Prostate Cancer Treatment Decisions.Cancers · 2023Article
- Intravoxel incoherent motion predicts positive surgical margins and Gleason score upgrading after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.La Radiologia medica · 2023Article
- Adverse Pathology after Radical Prostatectomy of Patients Eligible for Active Surveillance-A Summary 7 Years after Introducing mpMRI-Guided Biopsy in a Real-World Setting.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The prognostic value ofFrontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Clinical Predictors of Grade Group Upgrading for Radical Prostatectomy Specimens Compared to Those of Preoperative Needle Biopsy Specimens.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Predicting Prostate Cancer Upgrading of Biopsy Gleason Grade Group at Radical Prostatectomy Using Machine Learning-Assisted Decision-Support Models.Cancer management and research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recommendations for managing clinically localized prostate cancer are structured around clinical risk criteria, with prostate biopsy (PB) Gleason score (GS) being the most important factor. Biopsy to radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen upgrading/downgrading is well described, and is often the rationale for costly imaging or genomic studies. We present simple, no-cost analyses of clinical parameters to predict which GS 6 and GS 8 patients will change to GS 7 at prostatectomy. From May 2006 to December 2012, 1590 patients underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). After exclusions, we identified a GS 6 cohort of 374 patients and a GS 8 cohort of 91 patients. During this era, >1000 additional patients were enrolled in an active surveillance (AS) program. For GS 6, 265 (70.9%) of 374 patients were upgraded, and the cohort included 183 (48.9%) patients eligible for AS by the Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance Study (PRIAS) standards, of which 57.9% were upgraded. PB features that predicted a >90% chance of upgrading included ≥ 7 cores positive, maximum foci length ≥ 8 mm in any core, and total tumor involvement ≥ 30%. For GS 8, downgrading occurred in 46 (50.5%), which was significantly higher for single core versus multiple cores (80.4% vs 19.6%, P = 0.011). Biochemical recurrence (BCR) occurred in 3.4% of GS 6 upgraded versus 0% nonupgraded, and in GS 8, 19.6% downgraded versus 42.2% nondowngraded. In counseling men with clinically localized prostate cancer, the odds of GS change should be presented, and certain men with high-volume GS 6 or low-volume GS 8 can be counseled with GS 7-based recommendations.
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.