Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36874403›Full record

ArticleCancer research communications2022

Stromal FAP Expression is Associated with MRI Visibility and Patient Survival in Prostate Cancer.

Teijo Pellinen, Kevin Sandeman, Sami Blom, Riku Turkki, Annabrita Hemmes, Katja Välimäki, Juho Eineluoto, Anu Kenttämies, Stig Nordling, Olli Kallioniemi and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer research communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Teijo PellinenInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), Helsinki Institute of Life Science (HiLIFE), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-9652-7373
Kevin SandemanDepartment of Pathology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-5019-6254
Sami BlomInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), Helsinki Institute of Life Science (HiLIFE), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Riku TurkkiInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), Helsinki Institute of Life Science (HiLIFE), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-8690-6983
Annabrita HemmesInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), Helsinki Institute of Life Science (HiLIFE), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Katja VälimäkiInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), Helsinki Institute of Life Science (HiLIFE), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Juho EineluotoResearch Program in Systems Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Anu KenttämiesDepartment of Radiology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-3937-5307
Stig NordlingDepartment of Pathology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-5555-6645
Olli KallioniemiInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), Helsinki Institute of Life Science (HiLIFE), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-3231-0332
Antti RannikkoResearch Program in Systems Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-4261-3484
Tuomas MirttiDepartment of Pathology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-0455-9891
University of Helsinki · FIInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland · FIScience for Life Laboratory · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Some clinically significant prostate cancers are missed by MRI. We asked whether the tumor stroma in surgically treated localized prostate cancer lesions positive or negative with MRI are different in their cellular and molecular properties, and whether the differences are reflected to the clinical course of the disease. We profiled the stromal and immune cell composition of MRI-classified tumor lesions by applying multiplexed fluorescence IHC (mfIHC) and automated image analysis in a clinical cohort of 343 patients (cohort I). We compared stromal variables between MRI-visible lesions, invisible lesions, and benign tissue and assessed the predictive significance for biochemical recurrence (BCR) and disease-specific survival (DSS) using Cox regression and log-rank analysis. Subsequently, we carried out a prognostic validation of the identified biomarkers in a population-based cohort of 319 patients (cohort II). MRI true-positive lesions are different from benign tissue and MRI false-negative lesions in their stromal composition. CD163 Significance: These findings may have a significant impact on clinical decision making as more radical treatments may be recommended for men with a combination of MRI-visible primary tumors and FAP

Indexed as

Prostatic NeoplasmsFibroblast Activation Protein AlphaHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMalePrognosisProstateFibroblast Activation Protein Alpha

Identifiers

PMID36874403
PMCPMC9980917
OpenAlexW4220933016

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.