Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34359624›Full record

ReviewCancers2021

Glycosylation: Rising Potential for Prostate Cancer Evaluation.

Anna Kałuża, Justyna Szczykutowicz, Mirosława Ferens-Sieczkowska

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Comparison of denaturing agent effects in enzymaticTurkish journal of chemistry · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
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.

Anna KałużaDepartment of Chemistry and Immunochemistry, Wroclaw Medical University, Sklodowskiej-Curie 48/50, 50-369 Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-0161-3012
Justyna SzczykutowiczDepartment of Chemistry and Immunochemistry, Wroclaw Medical University, Sklodowskiej-Curie 48/50, 50-369 Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-6746-6591
Mirosława Ferens-SieczkowskaDepartment of Chemistry and Immunochemistry, Wroclaw Medical University, Sklodowskiej-Curie 48/50, 50-369 Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-8578-7487
Wroclaw Medical University · PL

Funding

Uniwersytet Medyczny im. Piastów Slaskich we Wroclawiu SUB.A070.19.034
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prostate cancer is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer among men. Alterations in protein glycosylation are confirmed to be a reliable hallmark of cancer. Prostate-specific antigen is the biomarker that is used most frequently for prostate cancer detection, although its lack of sensitivity and specificity results in many unnecessary biopsies. A wide range of glycosylation alterations in prostate cancer cells, including increased sialylation and fucosylation, can modify protein function and play a crucial role in many important biological processes in cancer, including cell signalling, adhesion, migration, and cellular metabolism. In this review, we summarize studies evaluating the prostate cancer associated glycosylation related alterations in sialylation, mainly α2,3-sialylation, core fucosylation, branched N-glycans, LacdiNAc group and presence of truncated O-glycans (sTn, sT antigen). Finally, we discuss the great potential to make use of glycans as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for prostate cancer.

Indexed as

biomarkersglycansglycosylationprostate cancerprostate specific antigen

Identifiers

PMID34359624
PMCPMC8345048
OpenAlexW3186059675

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.