Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate: Precursor or aggressive phenotype of prostate cancer?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although the term "intraductal carcinoma of the prostate" (IDC-P) was introduced almost 40 years ago, there is still the lack of appreciation that this entity represents a clinically aggressive disease that continues to be misreported under the diagnostic category of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN). METHODS: Recent data obtained from histological, molecular, and clinical studies were reviewed to demonstrate that IDC-P significantly differs from HGPIN, and has a major impact in terms of diagnosis, prognosis and therapy of prostate cancer (PCa). RESULTS: HGPIN is the only accepted precursor of PCa. Its diagnosis in prostate biopsies has no prognostic implications, and does not dictate therapeutic decisions. By contrast, IDC-P correlates with a worse pathological and clinical outcome. IDC-P differs from HGPIN by distinct histological and molecular features. Recent clinical studies report that IDC-P is associated with neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and, chemotherapy (CT) failure as well as early disease recurrence after external beam radiation. Finally, IDC-P is associated with TMPRSS2-ERG gene fusion, which was reported to be regulated by estrogens and their receptors. CONCLUSIONS: IDC-P is an aggressive phenotype of prostate cancer and predicts poor response to ADT, CT, and external beam radiation. IDC-P should be separated from HGPIN and should be reported in prostate biopsies and prostatectomy specimens.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".