ArticleThe Prostate2025
Histopathologic Features and Transcriptomic Signatures Do Not Solve the Issue of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Invisible Prostate Cancers: A Matched-Pair Analysis.
Article in The Prostate, 2025. 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.
- Prospective validation of a urine-based proteomics test for predicting clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naïve patients.British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Advances in focal therapy for prostate cancer: current modalities, outcomes, and future directions.Prostate international · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMultiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is pivotal in prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis, but some clinically significant (cs) PCa remain undetected. This study aims to understand the pathological and molecular basis for csPCa visibility at mpMRI.
methodsWe performed a retrospective matched-pair cohort study, including patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) for csPCa (i.e., ISUP grade group ≥ 2) from 2015 to 2020, in our tertiary-referral center. We screened for inclusion in the "mpMRI-invisible" cohort all consecutive men (N = 45) having a negative preoperative mpMRI. The "mpMRI-visible" cohort was matched based on age, PSA, prostate volume, ISUP grade group. Included patients underwent radiological and pathological open-label revisions and characterization of the tumor mRNA expression profile (analyzing 780 gene transcripts, signaling pathways, and cell-type profiling). We compared the clinical-pathological variables and the gene expression profile between matched pairs. The analysis was stratified according to histological characteristics and lesion diameter.
resultsWe included 34 patients (17 per cohort); mean age at RP and PSA were 70.5 years (standard deviation [SD] = 7.7), 7.1 ng/mL (SD = 3.3), respectively; 65% of men were ISUP 2. Overall, no significant differences in histopathological features, tumor diameter and location, mRNA profile, pathways, and cell-type scores emerged between cohorts. In the stratified analysis, an upregulation of cell adhesion and motility, of extracellular matrix remodeling and of metastatic process pathways was present in specific subgroups of mpMRI-invisible cancers.
conclusionsNo PCa pathological or gene-expression hallmarks explaining mp-MRI invisibility were identified. Aggressive features can be present both in mpMRI-invisible and -visible tumors.
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.