ReviewAbdominal radiology (New York)2020
How should radiologists incorporate non-imaging prostate cancer biomarkers into daily practice?
Review in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Blood and urine-based biomarkers in prostate cancer: Current advances, clinical applications, and future directions.The journal of liquid biopsy · 2025Review
- Enhancing prostate MRI expertise: educational strategies for radiologists.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Review
- Evaluation of the Predictive Role of Blood-Based Biomarkers in the Context of Suspicious Prostate MRI in Patients Undergoing Prostate Biopsy.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Prostate Cancer Radiogenomics-From Imaging to Molecular Characterization.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Competitive Advantage of PSMA Theranostics in Prostate Cancer.Radiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo review the current body of evidence surrounding non-imaging biomarkers in patients with known or suspected prostate cancer.
resultsSeveral non-imaging biomarkers have been developed and are available that aim to improve risk estimates at several clinical junctures. For patients with suspicion of prostate cancer who are considering first-time or repeat biopsy, blood- and urine-based assays can improve the prediction of harboring clinically significant disease and may reduce unnecessary biopsy. Blood- and urine-based biomarkers have been evaluated in association with prostate MRI, offering insights that might augment decision-making in the pre and post-MRI setting. Tissue-based genomic and proteomic assays have also been developed that provide independent assessments of prostate cancer aggressiveness that can complement imaging.
conclusionA growing number of non-imaging biomarkers are available to assist in clinical decision-making for men with known or suspected prostate cancer. An appreciation for the intersection of imaging and biomarkers may improve clinical care and resource utilization for men with prostate cancer.
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.