Netto et al published an argument against relabeling pattern 3 prostate disease as pre-cancerous: pattern 3 but not benign shares “canonical molecular alterations” with pattern 4. A literature review shows this to be false @uroegg @dr_coops bjui-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...
bjui-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com
Is Gleason pattern 3 cancer? Molecular features do not distinguish pattern 3 from benign tissue
Click on the article title to read more.