Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32683729›Full record

ReviewHistopathology2020

Prostate cancer growth patterns beyond the Gleason score: entering a new era of comprehensive tumour grading.

Geert J L H van Leenders, Esther I Verhoef, Eva Hollemans

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Histopathology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Geert J L H van LeendersDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2176-9102
Esther I VerhoefDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2734-0254
Eva HollemansDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2406-5370
Erasmus MC · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Gleason grading system is one of the most important factors in clinical decision-making for prostate cancer patients, and is entirely based on the classification of tumour growth patterns. In recent years it has become clear that some individual growth patterns themselves have independent prognostic value, and could be used for better personalised risk stratification. In this review we summarise recent literature on the clinicopathological value and molecular characteristics of individual prostate cancer growth patterns, and show how these, most particularly cribriform architecture, could alter treatment decisions for prostate cancer patients.

Indexed as

Neoplasm GradingPrognosisAdenocarcinomaClinical Decision-MakingHumansMaleProstatic Neoplasmscribriformgrowth patternprostate cancerthree-dimensional

Identifiers

PMID32683729
PMCPMC7756302
OpenAlexW3043580844

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.