ArticleJNCI cancer spectrum2023
Use of the Decipher genomic classifier among men with prostate cancer in the United States.
Article in JNCI cancer spectrum, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Review of Genomic-Based Risk Stratification in Localised Prostate Cancer Treatment Optimisation: Clinical Impact and Health Economic Evidence.Cancer medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Present status of prostate cancer diagnosis, limitations, challenges, and future endeavors.Annals of medicine · 2026Review
- Review
- A Platform-Independent Binary Gene-Pair Signature Derived from CRPC-Enriched Single-Cell Transcriptomics for Predicting Recurrence-Free Survival in Prostate Cancer.Cancer management and research · 2026Article
- Molecular Landscape of Prostate Cancer Across Age Groups: Impact on Prognosis and Treatment Outcomes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Comparative analysis of machine learning-derived nomogram and biomarkers in predicting side-specific extraprostatic extension: Preliminary findings.Clinical imaging · 2025Article
- The Role of Genomic Scores in the Management of Prostate Cancer Patients: A Comprehensive Narrative Review.Cancers · 2025Review
- The Clinical Impact of the Decipher Genomic Classifier in Prostate Cancer.The Eurasian journal of medicine · 2025Article
- Integration of Genomic Tests in Prostate Cancer Care: Implications for Clinical Practice and Patient Outcomes.Current issues in molecular biology · 2024Review
- The Evolving Molecular Landscape and Actionable Alterations in Urologic Cancers.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Review
- Reporting tumor genomic test results to SEER registries via linkages.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2024Article
- Development of a Longitudinal Prostate Cancer Transcriptomic and Clinical Data Linkage.JAMA network open · 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
34 authors at 20 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundManagement of localized or recurrent prostate cancer since the 1990s has been based on risk stratification using clinicopathological variables, including Gleason score, T stage (based on digital rectal exam), and prostate-specific antigen (PSA). In this study a novel prognostic test, the Decipher Prostate Genomic Classifier (GC), was used to stratify risk of prostate cancer progression in a US national database of men with prostate cancer.
methodsRecords of prostate cancer cases from participating SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) program registries, diagnosed during the period from 2010 through 2018, were linked to records of testing with the GC prognostic test. Multivariable analysis was used to quantify the association between GC scores or risk groups and use of definitive local therapy after diagnosis in the GC biopsy-tested cohort and postoperative radiotherapy in the GC-tested cohort as well as adverse pathological findings after prostatectomy.
resultsA total of 572 545 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 8927 patients underwent GC testing. GC biopsy-tested patients were more likely to undergo active active surveillance or watchful waiting than untested patients (odds ratio [OR] =2.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.04 to 2.38, P < .001). The highest use of active surveillance or watchful waiting was for patients with a low-risk GC classification (41%) compared with those with an intermediate- (27%) or high-risk (11%) GC classification (P < .001). Among National Comprehensive Cancer Network patients with low and favorable-intermediate risk, higher GC risk class was associated with greater use of local therapy (OR = 4.79, 95% CI = 3.51 to 6.55, P < .001). Within this subset of patients who were subsequently treated with prostatectomy, high GC risk was associated with harboring adverse pathological findings (OR = 2.94, 95% CI = 1.38 to 6.27, P = .005). Use of radiation after prostatectomy was statistically significantly associated with higher GC risk groups (OR = 2.69, 95% CI = 1.89 to 3.84).
conclusionsThere is a strong association between use of the biopsy GC test and likelihood of conservative management. Higher genomic classifier scores are associated with higher rates of adverse pathology at time of surgery and greater use of postoperative radiotherapy.In this study the Decipher Prostate Genomic Classifier (GC) was used to analyze a US national database of men with prostate cancer. Use of the GC was associated with conservative management (ie, active surveillance). Among men who had high-risk GC scores and then had surgery, there was a 3-fold higher chance of having worrisome findings in surgical specimens.
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.