ReviewOpen veterinary journal2023
Review in Open veterinary journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Digital Estrogen Receptor Alpha (ERα) Expression Analysis in Benign and Malignant Prostate Tissue of Men and Dogs.The Prostate · 2026Article
- In Vivo Prostate Cancer Modelling: From the Pre-Clinical to the Clinical Setting.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- An overview of stem cells and cell products involved in trauma injury.Regenerative therapy · 2025Review
- In Vitro Antitumor Effect of Oils Rich in CBD and THC Cannabis Extract in Canine Prostate Carcinoma Cell Lines.Veterinary sciences · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prostate cancer (PCa) is a prevalent malignancy affecting men worldwide. Animal models play a crucial role in studying PCa pathology and discovering novel approaches to prevent, detect and treat this disease. However, the challenge of translational medicine is the limited reproducibility and inadequate recapitulation of human conditions in animal models. Therefore, a comprehensive understanding of the macroscopic and microscopic anatomy of the prostate gland among distinct animal species is essential for better translating research findings to clinical practice. This review aims to compare and describe the macroscopic and microscopic anatomy of the prostate gland in humans, rats, and dogs, emphasizing the relevant features. Despite the anatomical differences between these species, rats are a valuable model to study human prostate diseases, once they share some features implicated in carcinogenesis in humans. Dogs, on the other hand, are considered the best model for studying PCa due to the development of spontaneous cancer with a higher incidence when compared with other animals and the development of bone metastases. Moreover, the lymphatic system and the sentinel lymph node role and mapping are similar in dogs and humans. However, it is important to recognize that no animal model can directly mimic all aspects of PCa as the human prostate is anatomically different from that of rats and dogs. Therefore, it is essential to analyze and understand the intra- and interspecies variability when translating research findings into clinical practice. This review highlights the importance of a thorough understanding of the anatomical differences between the prostate gland in humans, rats, and dogs when selecting the appropriate animal model for studying 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.