Observational studyAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2023
Immunohistochemical Expression of Alpha-Methyl-Coa (AMACR) and ERG in Prostatic Adenocarcinoma and Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Comparative Study.
Observational study in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis observational comparative study aimed at investigating the diagnostic accuracy of ERG in differentiating benign and malignant prostatic lesions and comparing it to the diagnostic accuracy of AMACR. We also aimed at comparing AMACR and ERG expression to Gleason grade of the carcinoma cases.
methodsSeventy- two cases (22 prostatic hyperplasia and 50 prostatic carcinoma) were collected from the pathology department at Cairo university. The cases were immunostained by antibodies against AMACR and ERG. Immunohistochemical expressions of both markers were differentially examined in benign and malignant cases, compared to each other's, as well as, to the grade group of the malignant cases.
resultsAMACR showed 62% sensitivity and 86.4% specificity for the diagnosis of PC, with a statistically significant differential expression in benign and malignant lesions (P=0.001). Its expression also correlated significantly with the age (p=0.007), Gleason grade (P=0.006) and perineural invasion (P=0.011). Although ERG showed 100% specificity to PC with no expression in hyperplasia cases, it showed only 22% sensitivity for PC cases. ERG expression also showed statistically significant correlation with the Gleason grade. No association between ERG and AMACR expression was detected in our study (P=0.151). Regarding the diagnostic accuracy, although ERG accuracy was much lower than that of AMACR, combining both markers yielded a higher diagnostic accuracy.
conclusionAlthough ERG proved no superior value than AMACR in diagnosing prostatic lesions, combining both markers may lead to higher diagnostic accuracy owing to higher ERG specificity for PC.
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.