ArticleAnnals of Saudi medicine
Evaluating the effect of histopathological parameters of prostate adenocarcinoma on prognosis in radical prostatectomy specimens.
Article in Annals of Saudi medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOver the past decade, significant updates have been made regarding the classification and grading of prostate adenocarcinoma in radical prostatectomy specimens, following decisions reached in international conferences and through impactful publications. These alterations are closely linked to patient prognosis.
objectivesObserve the incidence of these changes and their impact on patient prognosis. Additionally, investigate the relationship between histopathological and clinical parameters to assist in multidisciplinary treatment planning.
designRetrospective cohort study.
settingTertiary university hospital.
methodsHematoxylin and eosin, along with immunohistochemistry stained sections, were reevaluated, and clinical information, including patient demographics, preoperative PSA levels, and patient follow-up were collected from patients who underwent radical prostatectomy at our center. SAMPLE SIZE: 182 patients.
main outcome measuresBiochemical recurrence.
resultsThe study highlighted the negative prognostic effects of factors such as Gleason grade group, lymphovascular invasion, intraductal carcinoma, positive surgical margins, extraprostatic extension, pathological T stage, and seminal vesicle invasion. These factors are important determinants of recurrence-free survival in prostate adenocarcinoma patients.
conclusionThis study identified comedonecrosis and intraductal carcinoma as independent negative prognostic factors. A 3-mm cutoff for positive surgical margins was supported, while the current cutoff for extraprostatic extension may require reevaluation. The impact of cribriform pattern and ductal carcinoma appears to be influenced by the grade group. No independent relationship was found between the Gleason score/pattern on positive surgical margins or extraprostatic extension and prognosis. Further, large-scale studies with long-term follow-up are needed. LIMITATIONS: The study is limited by the relatively small number of patients for certain parameters.
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.