Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31439369›Full record

ArticleEuropean urology2020

Improved Prostate Cancer Biopsy Grading by Incorporation of Invasive Cribriform and Intraductal Carcinoma in the 2014 Grade Groups.

Geert J L H van Leenders, Charlotte F Kweldam, Eva Hollemans, Intan P Kümmerlin, Daan Nieboer, Esther I Verhoef, Sebastiaan Remmers, Luca Incrocci, Chris H Bangma, Theodorus H van der Kwast and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

48 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Current grading of prostate cancer.Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. [Current grading of prostate cancer. German version].Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Geert J L H van LeendersDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: g.vanleenders@erasmusmc.nl.
Charlotte F KweldamDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Eva HollemansDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Intan P KümmerlinDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Daan NieboerDepartment of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Esther I VerhoefDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Sebastiaan RemmersDepartment of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Luca IncrocciDepartment of Radiotherapy, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Chris H BangmaDepartment of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Theodorus H van der KwastLaboratory Medicine Program, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada.
Monique J RoobolDepartment of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGrade groups (GGs) are an important parameter for therapeutic decision making in prostate cancer (Pca) patients. Invasive cribriform and/or intraductal carcinoma (CR/IDC) has an independent prognostic value for disease outcome, but are not included in the GG limiting their clinical use.

objectiveTo perform a proof-of-principle study incorporating CR/IDC in the current GG. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsAll prostate biopsies of 1031 men with screen-detected Pca between 1993 and 2000 were reviewed for the current GG (ranging from 1 to 5) and CR/IDC. The cribriform grade (cGrade) was equal to the GG if CR/IDC was present and GG minus 1 if not. GG1 was cGrade1 if intraductal carcinoma was absent.

interventionBiopsy review for GG and CR/IDC. A total of 406 patients had received radical prostatectomy (RP), 508 radiotherapy (RT), 108 surveillance, and eight hormonal therapy, and the treatment was unknown for one patient. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis disease-specific survival (DSS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), and biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS) after 15.1 yr (interquartile range 10.9-19.7 yr) follow-up were compared using Harrell's C-statistic. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The biopsy GGs were 486 GG1, 310 GG2, 104 GG3, 64 GG4, and 67 GG5; cGrade distributions were 738 cGrade1, 102 cGrade2, 91 cGrade3, 58 cGrade4, and 42 cGrade5. The cGrade had a better discriminative value than the GG for DSS (C-index 0.79; 95% confidence interval 0.74-0.83 vs 0.76; 0.71-0.82) and MFS (0.79; 0.74-0.84 vs 0.77; 0.72-0.82). The discriminative value for BCRFS after RP and RT was similar for both models. Different diagnostic, such as use of sextant biopsies, and therapeutic strategies in the 1990s are the limitations of this study.

conclusionsThe cGrade is a simple Pca grade modification with better discriminative values for DSS and MFS than the GG, particularly impacting decision making in men with current GG2 Pca. PATIENT SUMMARY: Microscopic grading is an important factor for decision making in prostate cancer (Pca) patients. We show that a simple grade modification better predicts Pca outcome and might improve treatment choices.

Indexed as

AgedBiopsyCarcinoma, DuctalHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingNeoplasm InvasivenessProstateProstatic NeoplasmsCribriformGleason scoreGradeIntraductal carcinomaProstate cancer

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.