ReviewBiomedical papers of the Medical Faculty of the University Palacky, Olomouc, Czechoslovakia2025
Contemporary review of prognostic markers of prostate cancer from a pathologist perspective.
Review in Biomedical papers of the Medical Faculty of the University Palacky, Olomouc, Czechoslovakia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Integrated Cell-Death Program Defines Aggressive Prostate Cancer by Coupling Ezrin to the Hippo-YAP/TAZ Axis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Deletions ofBiomolecules · 2025Article
- New biomarkers and multiplex tests for diagnosis of aggressive prostate cancer and therapy management.Frontiers in oncology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prostate cancer is the most frequently diagnosed malignant tumour in men worldwide. To treat this condition, prognostic markers to distinguish indolent from aggressive disease, and biomarkers for metastatic forms are needed. From a pathologist's perspective, despite the plethora of emerging biomarkers, none to date has made its way into clinical practice. The need for prognostic and predictive markers following histological evaluation remains. This overview of some putative immunohistochemical and genetic markers reveals the pitfalls of biomarker research, notably verifiability, validity and interlaboratory comparison. Meta-analyses and extensive cooperation between pathology departments are a sine qua non. Codes of Best Practice such as the REMARK guidelines have been advocated as a path forward. Currently, the most widely used and validated prognostic marker remains the Gleason score. Ki67 along with PTEN are the most promising prognostic markers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39907090What 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.