ArticleHistopathology2025
Unexpectedly high variability in determining tumour extent in prostatic biopsies: implications for active surveillance.
Article in Histopathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retrospective Validation of a Resource-Aware Assistive AI Tool for Screening Prostate Needle Biopsies and Classifying Prostate Adenocarcinoma into ISUP Grade Groups.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Inter- and intra-rater variability of MRI-based lesion size measurements in active surveillance for prostate cancer: a multicentre study.European radiology · 2026Article
- Comparing Gleason Pattern 4 Measurement Approaches on Prostate Biopsy Using Machine Learning: A Proof-of-Principle Study.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Association between amide proton transfer-weighted imaging biomarkers and Gleason score in prostate cancer: a study on differential diagnosis from benign prostatic hyperplasia.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Prostate carcinoma in core biopsy : Diagnostic criteria, mimics/pitfalls, subtypes.Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- [Prostate cancer in the biopsy : Diagnostic criteria, mimickers/pitfalls, and subtypes].Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTumour content in prostatic biopsies is an important indicator of prostate cancer volume and patient prognosis. Consequently, guidelines typically recommend reporting it as a percentage or linear length (mm). This study aimed to determine the current practices for reporting tumour content in prostatic biopsies and evaluated the consistency among pathologists in diagnosing 10 standard biopsy cases of prostate cancer to assess interobserver variability. METHODS AND
resultsA web-based survey gathered data on demographics, experience and attitudes regarding the reporting of prostate cancer and its extent in biopsies. Virtual microscopy allowed analysis of 10 biopsy cases, each consisting of a single slide of prostate cancer. Self-reports from 304 participants recruited via the International Society of Urological Pathology and the German Society of Pathology were analysed. Most participants (43.4%) reported tumour extent as percentage of the biopsy core, 37.6% reported percentages and mm and 18.3% reported mm exclusively. The methods used to determine percentages showed an unexpected spread of choices, leading to considerable variability in results. Additionally, 40.8% of participants took part in the practical segment of the survey. The reported measures of tumour extent confirmed a notable interobserver variability, which was significantly higher for reported percentages.
conclusionA high rate of interobserver variability in reporting tumour content in prostatic biopsies was found. This matter is especially critical for patients who are candidates for active surveillance. Reporting absolute measures of tumour content has the advantage of lower variability in comparison to percentages.
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.