Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33968677›Full record

ReviewTranslational andrology and urology2021

Extracellular vesicles in prostate cancer: a narrative review.

Koji Hatano, Kazutoshi Fujita

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Translational andrology and urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Koji HatanoDepartment of Urology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan.
Kazutoshi FujitaDepartment of Urology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan.
Kindai University · JPOsaka University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the past decade, there has been remarkable progress in prostate cancer biomarker discovery using urine- and blood-based assays. A liquid biopsy is a minimally invasive procedure to investigate the cancer-related molecules in circulating tumor cells (CTCs), cell-free DNA, and extracellular vesicles (EVs). Liquid biopsies have the advantage of detecting heterogeneity as well as acquired resistance in cancer. EVs are cell-derived vesicles enclosed by a lipid bilayer and contain various molecules, such as nucleic acids, proteins, and lipids. In patients with cancer, EVs derived from tumors can be isolated from urine, plasma, and serum. The advances in isolation techniques provide the opportunity to use EVs as biomarkers in the clinic. Emerging evidence suggests that EVs can be useful biomarkers for the diagnosis of prostate cancer, especially high-grade cancer. EVs can also be potent biomarkers for the prediction of disease progression in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). EVs shed from cancer and stromal cells are involved in the development of tumor microenvironments, enhancing cancer progression, metastasis, and drug resistance. Here, we provide an overview of the use of EVs for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer as well as for predicting disease progression. We also discuss the biological function of EVs, which regulate cancer progression.

Indexed as

biomarkerexosomesExtracellular vesicles (EVs)prostate cancertumor microenvironment

Identifiers

PMID33968677
PMCPMC8100827
OpenAlexW3131480192

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.