ArticleProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2021
Correlative analysis between two commercially available post-prostatectomy genomic tests.
Article in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Towards implementation of precision medicine biomarkers in early detection and prognostication of prostate cancer.Cancer metastasis reviews · 2026Review
- Can Genomic Classifiers in Biopsy Cores With Grade Group 1 Cancer Predict Higher-Grade Disease Elsewhere in the Prostate? Results From the Prospective Miami Active Surveillance Trial.The Journal of urology · 2025Article
- Cross-Comparison Individual Patient-Level Analysis of Three Gene Expression Signatures in Localized Prostate in Over 50,000 Men.JCO precision oncology · 2025Article
- Integration of Genomic Tests in Prostate Cancer Care: Implications for Clinical Practice and Patient Outcomes.Current issues in molecular biology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMultiple genomic tests are available following radical prostatectomy (RP), however, there is a lack of head-to-head evidence for these tests. We sought to compare the performance of two genomic tests in predicting post-RP oncological outcomes.
methodsA cohort of 16 post-RP patients with adverse pathological features who had obtained both Decipher (D) and Prolaris (P) testing. The Pearson correlation was used to compare scores from D and cell cycle progression (CCP) from P. Then, we derived a microarray CCP (mCCP) from D and correlated with P-CCP. The associations of D and mCCP with biochemical recurrence (BCR) and metastasis (M) was evaluated in multivariable survival analysis (MVA) in a large cohort of RP patients treated at Johns Hopkins University (1992-2010). In addition, we characterized the expression of the 31 P-CCP genes and mCCP scores in a cohort of 17,967 RP samples from Decipher platform.
resultsThere was significant correlation between the D score and P-CCP (r = 0.67, p = 0.004), and between the 10-year probability of BCR reported by P and 5-year probability of M reported by D (r = 0.69, p = 0.003). In this cohort, mCCP derived from the D platform was highly correlated to the reported P-CCP scores from the P platform (r = 0.88, p = 6.7e-6). In a comparative retrospective RP cohort, both mCCP and D were significantly associated with M outcome (p < 0.01 for both). On MVA, D was a predictor of M (HR 1.3, 95% CI [1.12-1.52], p = 0.0005), while mCCP was not a predictor of M (p = 0.62). In the D platform cohort, the 31 P-CCP genes were correlated to each other, and TOP2A was the most correlated to mCCP (r = 0.7).
conclusionsWe found that P and D scores post-RP were correlated and help in identifying patients who at high risk of BCR in this cohort. In a larger cohort with longer follow-up, D was predictor of M, whereas mCCP was not.
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.