Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41545704›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Urology2026

Circulating tumour cells as a window into lethality in prostate cancer.

Sophia M Abusamra, Thineskrishna Anbarasan, Daniele T Cotton, Nithesh M S Ranasinha, Robert Barber, Suzannah Bridge, Carolyn Smith, Sandy Figiel, Wencheng Yin, Jason J Davis and 8 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. 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.

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

18 authors.

Sophia M AbusamraNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK. sophia.abusamra@nds.ox.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9588-5005
Thineskrishna AnbarasanNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.
Daniele T CottonNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology, and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3321-8554
Nithesh M S RanasinhaNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.
Robert BarberDepartment of Inorganic Chemistry, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.
Suzannah BridgeBodleian Health Care Libraries, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-9836-9200
Carolyn SmithBodleian Health Care Libraries, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7196-9116
Sandy FigielNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3889-3468
Wencheng YinNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.
Jason J DavisDepartment of Inorganic Chemistry, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.
Simpa S SalamiDepartment of Urologic Oncology, University of Michigan, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7461-7079
Freddie C HamdyNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.
Richard J BryantNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8330-9251
Yong-Jie LuBarts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, England, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6174-6621
Ian G MillsNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5347-5083
Claire M EdwardsNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.
Todd M MorganDepartment of Urologic Oncology, University of Michigan, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1140-0603
Alastair D LambNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prostate cancer is characterized by multifocality, inter- and intra-patient tumour heterogeneity, and differences in risk of progression to metastatic disease, castration resistance and lethality, which can make prognosis challenging. Consequently, sampling methods that provide accurate insight into disease phenotype to facilitate risk-stratification of patients are crucial. The variable biology of prostate cancer seems to be recapitulated in the phenotypic heterogeneity of circulating tumour cells (CTCs). CTC sampling offers a liquid biopsy method to achieve minimally invasive longitudinal sampling for disease monitoring. CTC analysis has also offered a crucial insight into aggressive phenotypes, disease metastasis and treatment response, particularly in clinical trials. The clinical use of CTC count for prognosis in advanced prostate cancer has been approved by the FDA, but is not routinely used clinically, as these cells are technically challenging to isolate and analyse. However, methodological advances continue to improve CTC enrichment and profiling. Understanding the clinical utility of CTCs and future innovations is crucial to incorporating CTCs into the clinical management of prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Neoplastic Cells, CirculatingProstatic NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorHumansMalePrognosisBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID41545704

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.