ArticleProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2020
Performance of clinicopathologic models in men with high risk localized prostate cancer: impact of a 22-gene genomic classifier.
Article in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genomic classifiers and prognosis of localized prostate cancer: a systematic review.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Analysis of a Biopsy-Based Genomic Classifier in High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Meta-Analysis of the NRG Oncology/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9202, 9413, and 9902 Phase 3 Randomized Trials.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2023Pooled it
- Characterizing population-wide genomic risk distribution for development of a novel clinical-genomic risk system for prognostication in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2026Article
- Increasing Cancer Stemness Drives Prostate Cancer Progression, Plasticity, Therapy Resistance and Poor Patient Survival.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- A Deep Learning-Based Multimodal Clinico-Histology-Genomic Prognostic Model in Prostate Cancer.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Downregulation of ANPEP Is Associated with Aggressive Prostate Cancer and Poor Disease-specific Outcomes.European urology open science · 2026Article
- Article
- Biomarkers in prostate cancer: current status and future directions in radiotherapy-statement from the Prostate Cancer Working Group of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO).Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025Review
- Expert Perspectives on Controversies in Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer Management: Narrative Review and Report of the First US Prostate Cancer Conference Part 1.JU open plus · 2024Article
- Molecular Mechanisms of Prostate Cancer Development in the Precision Medicine Era: A Comprehensive Review.Cancers · 2024Review
- Histology Specific Molecular Biomarkers: Ushering in a New Era of Precision Radiation Oncology.Seminars in radiation oncology · 2023Review
- Genomic biomarkers to guide precision radiotherapy in prostate cancer.The Prostate · 2022Review
- Association of adenosine signaling gene signature with estrogen receptor-positive breast and prostate cancer bone metastasis.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Recent Advances in the Management of High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer: Local Therapy, Systemic Therapy, and Biomarkers to Guide Treatment Decisions.American Society of Clinical Oncology educational book. American Society of Clinical Oncology. Annual Meeting · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors at 14 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProstate cancer exhibits biological and clinical heterogeneity even within established clinico-pathologic risk groups. The Decipher genomic classifier (GC) is a validated method to further risk-stratify disease in patients with prostate cancer, but its performance solely within National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk disease has not been undertaken to date.
methodsA multi-institutional retrospective study of 405 men with high-risk prostate cancer who underwent primary treatment with radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiation therapy (RT) with androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) at 11 centers from 1995 to 2005 was performed. Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the hazard ratios (HR) for the development of metastatic disease based on clinico-pathologic variables, risk groups, and GC score. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was determined for regression models without and with the GC score.
resultsOver a median follow-up of 82 months, 104 patients (26%) developed metastatic disease. On univariable analysis, increasing GC score was significantly associated with metastatic disease ([HR]: 1.34 per 0.1 unit increase, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19-1.50, p < 0.001), while age, serum PSA, biopsy GG, and clinical T-stage were not (all p > 0.05). On multivariable analysis, GC score (HR: 1.33 per 0.1 unit increase, 95% CI: 1.19-1.48, p < 0.001) and GC high-risk (vs low-risk, HR: 2.95, 95% CI: 1.79-4.87, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with metastasis. The addition of GC score to regression models based on NCCN risk group improved model AUC from 0.46 to 0.67, and CAPRA from 0.59 to 0.71.
conclusionsAmong men with high-risk prostate cancer, conventional clinico-pathologic data had poor discrimination to risk stratify development of metastatic disease. GC score was a significant and independent predictor of metastasis and may help identify men best suited for treatment intensification/de-escalation.
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.