ArticleHistopathology2020
Intraductal carcinoma has a minimal impact on Grade Group assignment in prostate cancer biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens.
Article in Histopathology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Genitourinary Pathology Society and International Society of Urological Pathology Joint Expert Consultation Recommendations on intraductal carcinoma of the prostate.Histopathology · 2026Guideline
- Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate: Impact of Grading Methods on Clinical Risk Stratification.International journal of surgical pathology · 2026Article
- Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate: A comprehensive literature review focused on grading challenges and controversies.Histology and histopathology · 2025Review
- International Society of Urological Pathology Consensus on Cancer Precursor Lesions. Working Group 1: The Prostate.The American journal of surgical pathology · 2025Article
- Review
- Review
- WHO Classification of Tumours fifth edition: evolving issues in the classification, diagnosis, and prognostication of prostate cancer.Histopathology · 2022Review
- Cribriform Patterned Lesions in the Prostate Gland with Emphasis on Differential Diagnosis and Clinical Significance.Cancers · 2022Review
- Large and small cribriform architecture have similar adverse clinical outcome on prostate cancer biopsies.Histopathology · 2022Article
- Article
- Prostate cancer growth patterns beyond the Gleason score: entering a new era of comprehensive tumour grading.Histopathology · 2020Review
- Intraductal carcinoma has a minimal impact on Grade Group assignment in prostate cancer biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens.Histopathology · 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsIntraductal carcinoma (IDC) is an adverse histopathological parameter for prostate cancer outcome, but is not incorporated in current tumour grading. To account for its dismal prognosis and to omit basal cell immunohistochemistry, it has been proposed to grade IDC on the basis of its underlying architectural pattern. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of IDC grade assignment on prostate cancer biopsy and radical prostatectomy tumour grading. METHODS AND
resultsA cohort of 1031 prostate cancer biopsies and 835 radical prostatectomies were assigned a Grade Group according to the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology guidelines, without incorporation of IDC in grading. Tumour grading was compared with a Grade Group in which IDC was graded on the basis of its underlying architecture. Of 1031 biopsies, 139 (13.5%) showed IDC. Grade assignment of IDC led to a Grade Group change in 17 (1.6%) cases: four of 486 (0.8%) Grade Group 1 cases were reclassified as Grade Group 2, nine of 375 (2.4%) Grade Group 2 cases were reclassified as Grade Group 3, and four of 58 (6.9%) Grade Group 4 cases were reclassified as Grade Group 5. IDC was observed in 213 of 835 (25.5%) radical prostatectomies, and its grading led to a change in tumour grade in five of 835 (0.6%) patients, with upgrading in two of 207 (1.0%) patients with Grade Group 1 cancer, in two of 420 (0.5%) patients with Grade Group 2 cancer, and in one of 50 (2%) patients with Grade Group 4 cancer.
conclusionIDC grade assignment led to a Grade Group change in 1.6% of prostate biopsy specimens and in 0.6% of radical prostatectomy specimens. Although the inclusion of IDC in or the exclusion of IDC from the Grade Group might affect decision-making in individual patients, it has a minimal impact on overall prostate cancer management.
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.