ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2022
Adverse upgrading and/or upstaging in contemporary low-risk prostate cancer patients.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The predictive value of PSMA PET/CT in determining pathological upgrading of prostate cancer: A pooling up analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Clinicopathologic profile of Filipino men with low-risk prostate cancer and predictors of unfavorable pathology at radical prostatectomy.Prostate international · 2026Article
- PSA Density and PIRADS 5 Lesions as Key Determinants of Upstaging After Radical Prostatectomy.Cancers · 2026Article
- The Impact of Endpoint Definitions on Predictors of Progression in Active Surveillance for Early Prostate Cancer.Cancers · 2026Article
- Article
- Tumor upgrading among very favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: how can it impact the clinical course?International urology and nephrology · 2024Article
- Managing prostate cancer after proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: feasibility and outcomes of single-port transvesical robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- External Tertiary-Care-Hospital Validation of the Epidemiological SEER-Based Nomogram Predicting Downgrading in High-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with Radical Prostatectomy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Differences in overall survival of T2N0M0 bladder cancer patients vs. population-based controls according to treatment modalities.International urology and nephrology · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 9 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUpgrading and/or upstaging in low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients may represent an indication for active treatment instead of active surveillance (AS). We addressed contemporary upgrading and/or upstaging rates in a large population based-cohort of low-risk PCa patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsWhitin the SEER database (2010-2015), NCCN low-risk PCa patients were identified across management modalities: radical prostatectomy (RP), radiotherapy (RT) and non-local treatment (NLT). In RP patients, upgrading and/or upstaging rates were assessed in logistic regression models.
resultsOverall, of 27,901 low-risk PCa patients, 38% underwent RP vs 28% RT vs 34% NLT. RP patients were the youngest and harbored the highest percentage of positive cores and a higher rate of cT2a than NLT. At RP, 46.2% were upgraded to GGG ≥ 2, 6.0% to GGG ≥ 3 and 10.5% harbored nonorgan-confined stage (NOC, pT3-4 or pN1). Of NOC patients, 1.6% harbored GGG ≥ 3, 6.3% harbored GGG2 and 2.6% harbored GGG1. Of pT2 patients, 4.4% harbored GGG ≥ 3, 33.9% harbored GGG2 and 51.3% harbored GGG1. Age, PSA, percentage of positive cores and number of positive cores independently predicted the presence of NOC and/or GGG ≥ 3, but with low accuracy (63.9%).
conclusionsIn low-risk PCa, critical changes between tumor grade and stage at biopsy vs RP may be expected in very few patients: NOC with GGG ≥ 3 in 1.6% and NOC with GGG2 in 6.3%. Other patients with upgrading and/or upstaging combinations will invariably harbor either pT2 or GGG1 that far less critically affect PCa prognosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.