ArticleLaboratory investigation; a journal of technical methods and pathology2026
Comprehensive Spatial Transcriptomic Profiling of Cribriform, Intraductal, Atypical Intraductal Proliferation, and Ductal Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate.
Article in Laboratory investigation; a journal of technical methods and pathology, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeCribriform acinar adenocarcinoma (AAC), intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P), atypical intraductal proliferation (AIP), and ductal adenocarcinoma (DAC) are linked to poor outcomes in prostate cancer. We analyzed their gene expression using spatial transcriptomics. MATERIALS AND
methodsA tissue microarray of 18 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded cores from 17 prostatectomies was profiled for expression of 18,676 messenger RNAs using the Bruker GeoMx Digital Spatial Profiler platform. In total, 53 areas of interest were selected based on hematoxylin and eosin staining, PIN 4 immunohistochemistry, and fluorescent markers. Gene set enrichment analysis was conducted for Reactome gene sets.
resultsMost patients had grade group ≥3 (94%) and ≥pT3 disease (65%). At a median follow-up of 47 (range, 18-130) months, 31% developed metastases. A total of 16 tumors showed mixed morphology. Three DACs had adjacent intraductal components with preserved basal cells (ductal IDC-P). Nine out of 10 acinar IDC-P and 6 out of 7 AIP presumably represented intraductal spread (invasive type); 1 was mostly noninvasive (95% IDC-P/AIP, putative precursor type). Cribriform AAC, acinar IDC-P, and AIP demonstrated substantial transcriptomic similarity, with only 4 differentially expressed genes between acinar IDC-P and cribriform AAC and between acinar IDC-P and AIP. Cribriform AAC exhibited Notch signaling and homologous recombination DNA repair enrichment versus low-grade AAC. Acinar IDC-P upregulated GADD45G/ERRFI1 and downregulated CCN3/TMEFF2, with reduced PKN1-mediated androgen receptor signaling versus cribriform AAC. AIP showed reduced G protein-coupled receptor signaling versus IDC-P and cribriform AAC. Acinar IDC-P upregulated TSPAN8/CA4 and downregulated TRPM8/DHCR24 versus AIP. Putative precursor-type-IDC-P/AIP downregulated oncogenic and stemness programs versus the invasive type. DAC was transcriptomically more similar to cribriform AAC than to non-cribriform AAC. Ductal IDC-P downregulated luminal epithelial programs and upregulated antigen presentation/immune signaling versus DAC.
conclusionsCribriform AAC, acinar IDC-P, and AIP demonstrated substantial transcriptomic similarity despite distinct differences. DAC showed greater transcriptomic similarity to cribriform AAC than to non-cribriform AAC.
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.