Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35538298›Full record

Observational studyThe Prostate2022

Clinical annotations for prostate cancer research: Defining data elements, creating a reproducible analytical pipeline, and assessing data quality.

Niamh M Keegan, Samantha E Vasselman, Ethan S Barnett, Barbara Nweji, Emily A Carbone, Alexander Blum, Michael J Morris, Dana E Rathkopf, Susan F Slovin, Daniel C Danila and 5 more

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in The Prostate, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Germline DNA Damage Repair Variants and Prognosis of Patients with High-Risk or Metastatic Prostate Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Microsatellite Instability, Tumor Mutational Burden, and Response to Immune Checkpoint Blockade in Patients with Prostate Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2024
    Article
  7. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. The Impact of PIK3R1 Mutations and Insulin-PI3K-Glycolytic Pathway Regulation in Prostate Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2022
    Article
  10. Differences in Prostate Cancer Genomes by Self-reported Race: Contributions of Genetic Ancestry, Modifiable Cancer Risk Factors, and Clinical Factors.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2022
    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

15 authors.

Niamh M KeeganDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Samantha E VasselmanDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Ethan S BarnettDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Barbara NwejiDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Emily A CarboneDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Alexander BlumDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Michael J MorrisDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Dana E RathkopfDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Susan F SlovinDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Daniel C DanilaDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Karen A AutioDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Howard I ScherDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Philip W KantoffDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Wassim AbidaDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Konrad H StopsackDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0722-1311

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
SPORE In Prostate CancerP50CA092629 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI JAMES A EASTHAM · 2001 to 2026
$63.0M
The Impact of DNA Damage Repair Abnormalities in Prostate CancerP01CA228696 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI OFFIT, KENNETH, POMERANTZ, MARK M. · 2019 to 2024
$8.7M
UROLOGY ONCOLOGY RESEARCH TRAINING GRANTT32CA082088 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Brett Stewart Carver · 1999 to 2026
$7.1M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA228696NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS P50 CA092629NCI NIH HHS T32 CA082088
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRoutine clinical data from clinical charts are indispensable for retrospective and prospective observational studies and clinical trials. Their reproducibility is often not assessed. We developed a prostate cancer-specific database for clinical annotations and evaluated data reproducibility.

methodsFor men with prostate cancer who had clinical-grade paired tumor-normal sequencing at a comprehensive cancer center, we performed team-based retrospective data collection from the electronic medical record using a defined source hierarchy. We developed an open-source R package for data processing. With blinded repeat annotation by a reference medical oncologist, we assessed data completeness, reproducibility of team-based annotations, and impact of measurement error on bias in survival analyses.

resultsData elements on demographics, diagnosis and staging, disease state at the time of procuring a genomically characterized sample, and clinical outcomes were piloted and then abstracted for 2261 patients (with 2631 samples). Completeness of data elements was generally high. Comparing to the repeat annotation by a medical oncologist blinded to the database (100 patients/samples), reproducibility of annotations was high; T stage, metastasis date, and presence and date of castration resistance had lower reproducibility. Impact of measurement error on estimates for strong prognostic factors was modest.

conclusionsWith a prostate cancer-specific data dictionary and quality control measures, manual clinical annotations by a multidisciplinary team can be scalable and reproducible. The data dictionary and the R package for reproducible data processing are freely available to increase data quality and efficiency in clinical prostate cancer research.

Indexed as

Data AccuracyProstatic NeoplasmsElectronic Health RecordsHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective Studiesclinical dataelectronic health recordopen source softwareprostate cancerreproducibility

Identifiers

PMID35538298
PMCPMC9246896

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.