ReviewCentral European journal of urology2025
Reclassification of prostate cancer on first confirmatory prostate biopsy in men under active surveillance: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Central European journal of urology, 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.
- Review
- Prostate cancer: Improving lives by not "overtreating" patients.Central European journal of urology · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Prostate cancer is typically diagnosed following prostate biopsy. In low-risk and selected favourable intermediate-risk disease, active surveillance is the treatment strategy of choice. In these men, a confirmatory biopsy performed. We report on the rates of risk upgrading at biopsy confirmatory that may represent a need to pursue further treatment in lieu of active surveillance. Material and methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of pooled reclassification rates of men on active surveillance at first confirmatory biopsy, in line with PRISMA recommendations. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane central registry for clinical trials were searched until June 2024. Stata was used to pool reclassification rates at first confirmatory biopsy. Results: Seventeen studies from 9 countries comprising 6,039 patients were included. Transrectal biopsy was the most common biopsy method for confirmatory biopsy. Weighted pooled rates of upgrading on first confirmatory biopsy were 20% with a 95% confidence interval of 19-21%. Conclusions: Approximately 20% of men undergoing active surveillance were upgraded at confirmatory biopsy. This may alter the management of these patients, and it highlights the importance of a confirmatory biopsy.
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.