ArticleJCO precision oncology2025
Sociodemographic Features, Health Care Costs, and Treatment Implications of Genomic Classifier Testing for Localized Prostate Cancer in the United States.
Article in JCO precision oncology, 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.
- Patients with high-risk features on active surveillance for prostate cancer.Prostate international · 2026Review
- Beyond One-Size-Fits-All Active Surveillance for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer: Risk-Adapted Follow-Up, De-Escalation Pathways, and Focal Therapy as Tailored Strategy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
purposeBiopsy tissue-based genomic classifiers (GCs) for prostate cancer are commercially available tools to enhance prognostication. They may corroborate candidacy for active surveillance/watchful waiting (AS/WW) or identify men who are more likely to benefit from radiotherapy (RT) with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). We analyze real-world use of GC and associations with clinical decision making. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe examined US commercial (n = 134,561) and Medicare (n = 68,431) insurance claims of men with newly diagnosed, localized prostate cancer between 2013 and 2022. We evaluated utilization of GCs over time and compared use of AS/WW, RT with or without ADT, radical prostatectomy (RP), or focal ablative therapy (FT) based on the receipt and type of GC.
resultsGC utilization increased from <1% to 17% in 8 years with a median payment of $3,001 (IQR, $0-3,873). Younger age, higher median household income, and high-deductible health insurance were associated with higher odds of receiving a GC (all
conclusionWe show contemporary, real-world GC utilization trends, costs, and associations with treatment patterns. Prospective trials are ongoing to validate GC-informed treatment, but US uptake has expanded and management is associated with the use and type of GC.
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.