Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41823190›Full record

ReviewHistology and histopathology2026

Do patterns of perineural invasion improve risk stratification in prostate cancer? A narrative review.

Hiroshi Miyamoto

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Histology and histopathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Hiroshi MiyamotoDepartments of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine and Urology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA. hiroshi_miyamoto@urmc.rochester.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The presence of perineural invasion (PNI), typically defined as direct contact between cancer cells and nerves, is a well-established adverse prognostic factor following definitive treatment when identified on prostate needle core biopsy. In contrast, there are mixed data regarding the clinical significance of PNI detected in radical prostatectomy specimens. Beyond the mere presence of PNI in prostate cancer specimens, several studies have suggested that quantification of the number of PNI foci may provide additional prognostic information. Nonetheless, it remains controversial whether the patterns of PNI contribute meaningfully to the risk stratification of prostate cancer. Notably, the definition of PNI appears to remain inconsistent among pathologists, ranging from broad interpretations of focal tumor involvement in or around a nerve to strict criteria requiring complete circumferential nerve encirclement. This narrative review summarizes and discusses available data supporting or refuting the clinical impact of PNI patterns, including size, degree, or other morphologic features, in men with prostate cancer. Current evidence indicates that, at least on prostate biopsy, PNI patterns generally lack independent clinical utility, while significant data exist to support the prognostic relevance of PNI patterns in radical prostatectomy specimens (and several other types of solid tumors). Until further studies providing more solid evidence are available, it may be prudent for pathologists to document and consider any patterns as PNI, especially in prostate biopsy specimens.

Indexed as

Prostatic NeoplasmsHumansMaleNeoplasm InvasivenessPrognosisProstateProstatectomyRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID41823190

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.