ArticleCentral European journal of urology2026
Does body mass index affect the proper pre-operative grade and stage assessment in patients with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy?
Article in Central European journal of 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.
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
Introduction: Accurate pre-operative assessment of prostate cancer (PCa) grade and stage is critical for determining the optimal treatment strategy and predicting oncological outcomes. Body mass index (BMI) may affect the diagnostic accuracy of pre-operative evaluations.Aim of the study is to investigate whether BMI affects the accuracy of pre-operative grade and stage assessment in patients PCa who undergo robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Material and methods: This retrospective study analyzed 338 patients with PCa who underwent RARP, assessing concordance between preoperative and postoperative tumor grade (ISUP, Gleason) and stage (TNM) across BMI categories. Correlations between BMI and histopathological parameters were examined, and potential risk factors for underestimation in preoperative evaluation were identified. Results: The median age and BMI of the cohort was 67 years. The median BMI was 27.4 with 49.7% overweight and 25.6% obese. Upstaging occurred in 56.4% of cases, with concordance in 34.9% and overestimation in 8.7%. Underestimation rates increased progressively with BMI - 51.8% (normal weight), 54.5% (overweight), and 65.4% (obese). Similarly, ISUP grade concordance declined with higher BMI, from 48.7% in normal-weight to 31.2-33.8% in obese patients, paralleled by higher underestimation (34-36% vs 49-54%). Gleason score concordance also fell with increasing BMI, while underestimation rose accordingly. Although BMI correlated weakly with most postoperative pathological parameters, higher BMI was significantly associated with underestimation of grade and stage. Metabolic comorbidities (particularly hypertension and diabetes) further amplified this trend. Conclusions: Elevated BMI is associated with a progressively increased risk of underestimating PCa grade and stage during preoperative assessment. The reduced concordance across TNM staging, ISUP grading, and Gleason scoring is observed in obese patient with PCa. Due to the risk of underestimating PCa, patients in this group should be very cautiously selected for active surveillance.
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.