ReviewCentral European journal of urology2024
Genitourinary microbiomes and prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of tumorigeneses and cancer characteristics.
Review in Central European journal of urology, 2024. 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.
- Urinary Biomarkers in Urological Oncology: From Biological Origin to Clinical Decision-Making-A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Microbial Genomic Consortia in Prostate Cancer: Mechanistic Signaling, the Gut-Prostate Axis, and Translational Perspectives.Cancers · 2026Review
- Research progress and clinical translation prospects of the urinary tract microbiome in prostate cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: We assessed the association of genitourinary microbiomes with prostate cancer (PCa) tumorigeneses and cancer characteristics. Material and methods: A systematic search and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. The primary endpoints were the association between relative abundance of genitourinary microbiomes and PCa compared to non-cancerous men/prostate specimen, high grade disease, and disease progression. The odds ratio (OR) was used as the summary statistic, and results were reported with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Seventeen studies, comprising 2,195 patients were eligible for review and meta-analysis. The specific microbiomes in urine, prostate tissue, and prostate (or seminal) secretions were significantly more abundant in patients with PCa compared to men in the control groups in individual studies. Certain bacterial phyla, genuses, and species were significantly associated with PCa aggressiveness and disease progression in individual studies. The relative abundance meta-analysis of five urine microbiomes revealed no statistically significant differences between PCa patients and control groups (pooled OR, 1.35; 95% CI: 0.70-2.59). Conclusions: Our systematic review indicates that specific genitourinary microbiomes are more abundant in PCa and have a potential to predict/prognosticate disease aggressiveness and clinical outcomes. Nevertheless, these findings should be interpreted with caution owing to the significant heterogeneity among studies in terms of microbiome analysis method, assessed sample's characteristics, and individual biological behavior of microbiomes for analysis. Further studies are needed to validate these observations and shed more light on the role of the microbiome across the development and natural history of PCa.
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.