ArticleBMC urology2023
Prostate cancer risk prediction based on clinical factors and prostate-specific antigen.
Article in BMC urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Prognostic Significance ofCancer genomics & proteomics · 2025Article
- Increased GPR35 expression is correlated with poor prognosis in prostate cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Bolstering CD8Biology · 2025Review
- Exploring the Link Between Obligate Anaerobe-Related Dysbiosis and Prostate Cancer Development: A Pilot Study.Cancers · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe incidence rate of prostate cancer (PCa) has continued to rise in Korea. This study aimed to construct and evaluate a 5-year PCa risk prediction model using a cohort with PSA < 10 ng/mL by incorporating PSA levels and individual factors.
methodsThe PCa risk prediction model including PSA levels and individual risk factors was constructed using a cohort of 69,319 participants from the Kangbuk Samsung Health Study. 201 registered PCa incidences were observed. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to generate the 5-year risk of PCa. The performance of the model was assessed using standards of discrimination and calibration.
resultsThe risk prediction model included age, smoking status, alcohol consumption, family history of PCa, past medical history of dyslipidemia, cholesterol levels, and PSA level. Especially, an elevated PSA level was a significant risk factor of PCa (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.77, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [1.67-1.88]). This model performed well with sufficient discrimination ability and satisfactory calibration (C-statistic: 0.911, 0.874; Nam-D'Agostino test statistic:19.76, 4.21 in the development and validation cohort, respectively).
conclusionsOur risk prediction model was effective in predicting PCa in a population according to PSA levels. When PSA levels are inconclusive, an assessment of both PSA and specific individual risk factors (e.g., age, total cholesterol, and family history of PCa) could provide further information in predicting PCa.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.