Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36768533›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2023

Biomarkers of Aggressive Prostate Cancer at Diagnosis.

Brock E Boehm, Monica E York, Gyorgy Petrovics, Indu Kohaar, Gregory T Chesnut

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed
–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

43 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. METCAM/MUC18 is a Biomarker and Therapeutic Target for Prostate Cancer.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Translational cancer research · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Circulating biomarkers for diagnosis and response to therapies in cancer patients.International review of cell and molecular biology · 2025
    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

5 authors.

Brock E BoehmUrology Service, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD 20814, USA.
Monica E YorkSchool of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of Health Science, Bethesda, MD 20814, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3350-9244
Gyorgy PetrovicsCenter for Prostate Disease Research, Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences and the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD 20814, USA.
Indu KohaarCenter for Prostate Disease Research, Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences and the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD 20814, USA.
Gregory T ChesnutUrology Service, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD 20814, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the United States, prostate cancer (CaP) remains the second leading cause of cancer deaths in men. CaP is predominantly indolent at diagnosis, with a small fraction (25-30%) representing an aggressive subtype (Gleason score 7-10) that is prone to metastatic progression. This fact, coupled with the criticism surrounding the role of prostate specific antigen in prostate cancer screening, demonstrates the current need for a biomarker(s) that can identify clinically significant CaP and avoid unnecessary biopsy procedures and psychological implications of being diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer. Although several diagnostic biomarkers are available to clinicians, very few comparative trials have been performed to assess the clinical effectiveness of these biomarkers. It is of note, however, that a majority of these clinical trials have been over-represented by men of Caucasian origin, despite the fact that African American men have a 1.7 times higher incidence and 2.1 times higher rate of mortality from prostate cancer. Biomarkers for CaP diagnosis based on the tissue of origin include urine-based gene expression assays (PCA3, Select MDx, ExoDx Prostate IntelliScore, Mi-Prostate Score, PCA3-PCGEM1 gene panel), blood-based protein biomarkers (4K, PHI), and tissue-based DNA biomarker (Confirm MDx). Another potential direction that has emerged to aid in the CaP diagnosis include multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI), which in conjunction with clinically validated biomarkers may provide a better approach to predict clinically significant CaP at diagnosis. In this review, we discuss some of the adjunctive biomarker tests along with newer imaging modalities that are currently available to help clinicians decide which patients are at risk of having high-grade CaP on prostate biopsy with the emphasis on clinical utility of the tests across African American (AA) and Caucasian (CA) men.

Indexed as

Prostatic NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorBiopsyEarly Detection of CancerHumansMaleProstateProstate-Specific AntigenUnited StatesBiomarkers, TumorProstate-Specific Antigenbiomarkersdiagnosisprostate cancerrace

Identifiers

PMID36768533
PMCPMC9916581

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.