ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2026
An O-glycosylation-based prognostic signature for biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer identifies
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Prostate cancer (PCa) is frequently diagnosed in men, and biochemical recurrence (BCR) remains a persistent problem after clinical treatment. Commonly used indicators do not identify patients who are likely to relapse early. Protein O-linked glycosylation is an important post-translational modification involved in cancer progression, but its prognostic relevance and regulatory mechanisms in PCa remain insufficiently understood. Methods: Different machine-learning approaches were tested during model development. The final score O-glycosylation scores (OGs) was then examined for risk classification, nomogram construction, and prediction of drug sensitivity. Results: The O-glycosylation signature consistently stratified patients into distinct risk groups across multiple independent cohorts (P<0.01), and the derived risk score remained an independent predictor of BCR [hazard ratio (HR) >1.48, P<0.05]. A nomogram integrating the O-glycosylation signature with clinicopathological variables achieved good performance in estimating 1-, 3-, and 5-year BCR probabilities [area under the curve (AUC): 0.747-0.863]. Drug-sensitivity analysis suggested that patients with different OGs scores may show distinct predicted responses to candidate agents, including AZD7762, a checkpoint kinase inhibitor, and tigecycline, a glycylcycline antibiotic with reported antitumor activity. Conclusions: This study establishes an O-glycosylation-related prognostic model for BCR risk stratification in PCa and identifies
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.