ReviewDiseases (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: A Comparative Evaluation of Biological Techniques.
Review in Diseases (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most prevalent cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. This review aims to synthesize the contemporary literature (2018-2026) on various diagnostic approaches of PCa for clinicians. Currently, the standard approach to PCa diagnosis includes (1) prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, (2) its derivatives, and (3) digital rectal examination (DRE). This approach is readily available and cost-effective but lacks specificity, thus resulting in a high incidence of overdiagnosis and overtreatment of PCa patients. This review aims to compare the traditional approaches with the newly developed approaches to PCa diagnosis and investigate their suitability for research purposes, including urine-based markers, liquid biopsy, and histopathology. Each of these approaches has advantages and disadvantages. Advanced imaging techniques like multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) are helpful in the localization of PCa and can prevent unnecessary biopsies. Histopathology remains the gold standard in the confirmation of PCa diagnosis. Newly developed blood-based markers and advanced imaging techniques are more sensitive and specific in the diagnosis of PCa and are likely to result in a better clinical outcome than the traditional approaches. However, the cost of these approaches remains a global challenge in developing and developed countries alike. PCa diagnosis tools and strategies are presented in a clinical and cost-effective manner and are integrated in a tiered approach with the aim of controlling and managing PCa and its diagnosis.
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.