Observational studyInternational journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association2026
Retrospective Single Center Assessment of Routes to Penile Cancer Diagnosis and the Role of Penile Biopsy.
Observational study in International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the routes to penile cancer diagnosis and the role of penile biopsy. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective observational study from a tertiary referral center included 625 patients referred as urgent suspected penile cancer within the Danish Cancer Patient Pathway (CPP) and 216 patients undergoing penile biopsy outside the CPP between January 1, 2021 and March 31, 2025. The main outcomes were the number of patients diagnosed within and outside the CPP and secondary outcomes included biopsy findings, the ratio between urgent suspected penile cancer referrals and the number of patients subsequently diagnosed with penile cancer.
resultsAmong 529 patients referred under the CPP for suspected penile cancer, only 10% were diagnosed with cancer. Biopsy confirmed cancer was more frequent within the CPP, though overall cancer detection rates were similar (~10%). Patients biopsied outside the CPP were younger and more often had prior biopsies. Complication rates after penile biopsy were low and comparable between groups. Diagnostic concordance between clinical suspicion and histology was slight (κ = 0.20, SE 0.04) for cancer and fair (κ = 0.33, SE 0.05) for PeIN. Biopsies demonstrated both diagnostic and therapeutic value, occasionally altering clinical management.
conclusionThe CPP identifies a higher proportion of malignancies but with a low overall conversion ratio, and some cancers are still diagnosed outside the pathway. Penile biopsy is safe and essential for accurate diagnosis due to low clinical-histological concordance, with added therapeutic value. Continued focused penile biopsy use, including re-biopsy in uncertain cases, is warranted to ensure optimal management and oncological safety.
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.