ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2020
Prediction of pathologic upgrading in Gleason score 3+4 prostate cancer: Who is a candidate for active surveillance?
Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Predicting the upgrading of the International Society of Urological Pathology Grade Group in nonclinically significant prostate cancer: a multicenter observational study.Asian journal of andrology · 2026Observational
- Decreased Tissue Sodium Concentration in Suspected Prostate Cancer Detected by Internal-ReferenceDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The Impact of Endpoint Definitions on Predictors of Progression in Active Surveillance for Early Prostate Cancer.Cancers · 2026Article
- Article
- The impact of biopsy core length on the discrepancy in Gleason scores between biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen.BJUI compass · 2025Article
- Establishing a model predicting Gleason grade group upgrading in prostate cancer.Translational andrology and urology · 2024Article
- Risk factors for Gleason score upgrade from prostate biopsy to radical prostatectomy.Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2024Review
- Intravoxel incoherent motion predicts positive surgical margins and Gleason score upgrading after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.La Radiologia medica · 2023Article
- Risk and predictors of adverse pathology after radical prostatectomy in patients diagnosed with IUSP 1-2 prostate cancer at MRI-targeted biopsy: a multicenter analysis.World journal of urology · 2023Article
- A high high-density lipoprotein level is associated with Gleason score upgrade in Chinese patients diagnosed with high-grade prostate carcinoma.BMC urology · 2023Article
- The prognostic value ofFrontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Impact of delay from transperineal biopsy to radical prostatectomy upon objective measures of cancer control.Asian journal of urology · 2022Article
- Prostate Cancer Biomarker Development: National Cancer Institute's Early Detection Research Network Prostate Cancer Collaborative Group Review.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2020Review
- Clinicopathological factors associated with pathological upgrading from biopsy to prostatectomy in patients with ISUP grade group ≤2 prostate cancer.Asian journal of andrologyArticle
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Whether active surveillance (AS) can be safely extended to patients with Gleason score (GS) 3+4 prostate cancer is highly debated. We examined the incidence and predictors of upgrading among patients with GS 3+4 disease. Materials and Methods: The study involved 377 patients with biopsy GS 3+4 who underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RP) from 2014 to 2018 at a single institution. We analyzed the rate of GS upgrading and used logistic regression to determine the predictors of upgrading. Results: A total of 168 (44.6%) patients with GS 3+4 experienced an upgrade in GS. In multivariable analysis, advanced age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, PSA density (PSAD) and Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) score were significant predictors of GS upgrading. When structured into a predictive model that included age ≥65 years, PSA ≥7.7 ng/mL, PSAD ≥0.475 ng/mL Conclusions: A substantial proportion of patients with GS 3+4 prostate cancer were upgraded after RP. However, according to our model combining clinical and imaging predictors, patients with a low risk of GS upgrading may be eligible candidates for AS.
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.