ArticleBiomarker research2024
Validation of a prognostic blood-based sphingolipid panel for men with localized prostate cancer followed on active surveillance.
Article in Biomarker research, 2024. 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.
- Predictive models for biopsy upgrading in active surveillance for prostate cancer: a scoping review.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Integrating anamnestic and lifestyle data with sphingolipid levels for risk-based prostate cancer screening.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Observational
- GLP-1 Agonist Use Among Men With Localized Prostate Cancer: A Narrative Review and Rationale for Prospective Clinical Trials.Urology · 2025Review
- Multimode MALDI-MSI deciphers matrine-induced metabolic reprogramming in prostate cancer xenografts: spatial mapping of low-molecular-weight compound alterations.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe previously reported that increases in circulating sphingolipids are associated with elevated risk of biopsy Gleason grade group (GG) upgrading in men on Active Surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer. Here, we aimed to validate these findings and establish a blood-based sphingolipid biomarker panel for identifying men on AS who are at high-risk of biopsy GG upgrading.
methodsMen diagnosed with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer in one of two AS cohorts (CANARY PASS and MDACC) were followed for GG upgrading after diagnostic and confirmatory biopsy. The PASS cohort consisted of 544 patients whereas the MDACC Cohort consisted of 697 patients. The number of patients with GG upgrading during course of study follow-up in the PASS and MDACC cohorts were 98 (17.7%) and 133 (19.1%), respectively. Plasmas collected prior to confirmatory biopsy were used for mass spectrometry-based quantitation of 87 unique sphingolipid species. A neural network layer based on 21 sphingolipids was developed in the CANARY PASS cohort for predicting biopsy GG upgrading. Tertile-based thresholds for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk strata were subsequently developed for the sphingolipid panel as well as a model that combined the sphingolipid panel with PSA density and rate of core positivity on diagnostic biopsy. The resultant models and risk thresholds for GG upgrading were validated in the MDACC cohort. Performance was assessed using Cox proportional hazard models, C-index, AUC, and cumulative incidence curves.
resultsThe sphingolipid panel had a HR (per unit standard deviation increase) of 1.36 (95% CI: 1.07-1.70) and 1.35 (95% CI: 1.11-1.64) for predicting GG biopsy upgrading in the PASS and MDACC cohort, respectively. The model that combined the sphingolipid panel with PSA density and rate of core positivity achieved a HR of 1.63 (95% CI: 1.33-2.00) and 1.44 (1.25-1.66), respectively. Tertile-based thresholds, established in the PASS cohort, were applied to the independent MDACC cohort. Compared to the low-risk group, MDACC patients in the high-risk strata had a GG biopsy upgrade HR of 3.65 (95% CI: 2.21-6.02), capturing 50% of the patients that had biopsy upgrading during study follow-up.
conclusionsThe sphingolipid panel is independently associated with GG biopsy upgrading among men in two independent AS cohorts who have previously undergone diagnostic and confirmatory biopsy. The sphingolipid panel, together with clinical factors, provides a potential means for risk stratification to better guide clinical management of men on AS.
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.