Observational studyThe oncologist2025
Homologous recombination repair genetic testing variables and diagnostic paths for prostate cancer patients: a multicenter cohort study.
Observational study in The oncologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Liquid biopsy: a new window on the BRCA genes.ESMO open · 2026Review
- BRCA Testing in Prostate Cancer: A Histopathologist's Perspective.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Circulating cell-free DNA and circulating tumor DNA as a prognostic biomarker in metastatic spine disease, is there a role?Neurosurgical review · 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
33 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvidence on homologous recombination repair (HRR) mutation prevalence in prostate cancer (PC) patients and the diagnostic testing path to guide treatment remains limited outside of clinical trials. The objective of this study was to investigate the DNA source, type of tumor tissue, timing for testing in the patient's disease course, and rate of conclusive results in a real-world population. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis was an observational, cohort study, involving 20 Italian cancer centers. The study population included consecutive PC patients undergoing germline, tumor, and/or plasma circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) to profile HRR genes between January 1, 2020 and January 31, 2025.
resultsAmong 1400 PC patients included, 248 (17.7%) showed (likely)pathogenic variants (PVs) in the HRR genes. Most HRR testing was conducted during the metastatic castration-resistant PC (mCRPC)(779, 62.8%). The rate of conclusive results was 89.7% and varied widely according to the type of tumor tissue. The prevalence of HRR alterations was 18.1% in the mCRPC and 13.8% in the hormone-sensitive PC (P = .06). The concordance between tumor testing and ctDNA was 83.9%. Interestingly, 4.6% reported ctDNA testing positive but tumor testing negative, leading to important therapeutic implications. The prevalence of positive ctDNA testing was 47.4% vs 10.5%, for testing within 1 month or over 3 months, respectively, from the initiation of a new line of therapy.
conclusionThis large real-world study, through the workflow adopted by clinicians for HRR genomic testing, provides novel insights into the variables influencing the success rate of genomic testing.
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.