ArticleCureus2024
Systematic Biopsy vs. Prostatectomy: Evaluating Correlations and Grading Discrepancies in Prostate Cancer.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mitigating bias in prostate cancer diagnosis using synthetic data for improved AI driven Gleason grading.NPJ precision oncology · 2025Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion-guided targeted biopsy and ultrasound-guided systematic biopsy for prior negative prostate biopsy: A meta-analysis.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Prostate Cancer (PCa) represents a growing global health challenge. The main factor in predicting PCa prognosis is represented by the Gleason Score (GS) therefore, the accuracy of pathological features from preoperative biopsy is critical in the management of the patient. We aimed to investigate the correlation between prostate biopsy parameters and the prostatectomy specimen pathological features and to identify factors that lead to over- and under-grading tumors in biopsy samples. Materials and methods We performed a retrospective study that included 110 male patients with confirmed PCa, selected based on specific inclusion criteria. Biopsy and radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens were analyzed using standard histopathological techniques, and pathological features were assessed according to the latest guidelines. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 26.0.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Results The study included 110 male patients with a median age of 67 years old, ranging from 48 to 79 years old. Correlations between biopsy parameters and RP outcomes were assessed and revealed several key findings. The tumoral length on biopsy was correlated with positive surgical margin (r=0.289, p<0.01) and with tumoral volume (r=0.526, p<0.001) on prostatectomy. Patients with higher grade groups (GG) on biopsy had an approximately four times higher chance of exhibiting extraprostatic extension. We demonstrated a significant correlation between Gleason Pattern 4 (%GP4) on biopsy and pT stage, with pT4 showing the highest %GP4, and a noticeable increase in %GP4 as the pT stage progressed from pT2b to pT4. The study found a significantly higher rate of undergrading at biopsy (30.90%) compared to overgrading (6.36%). Additionally, greater tumor length and higher tumor percentages in biopsies improved grading accuracy (p<0.001). Conclusion Our findings suggest that systemic biopsies play a key role in predicting pathological outcomes, especially through parameters that serve as key prognostic markers. However, due to the potential of the biopsy results to be under- or overgraded, urologists should take into consideration the advantages of using repeat biopsies or additional imaging techniques to achieve a more precise diagnosis and treatment strategy.
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.