Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Opposing roles of acid phosphatase 1 (ACP1) and ACP3 in prostate cancer progression.

Created on 29 Oct 2026

Authors

Alessandra V de S Faria, Carmen V Ferreira-Halder, Maikel P Peppelenbosch, Gwenny M Fuhler

Published in

BJU international. Oct 28, 2026. Epub Oct 28, 2026.

Abstract

To evaluate the roles of intracellular acid phosphatase 1 (ACP1) and ACP3 expression as biomarkers of prostate cancer progression through a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing associations with disease presence, tumour aggressiveness, and patient prognosis.
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the associations between ACP1 and ACP3 expression and clinical outcomes, including disease presence, Gleason grade, tumour stage, lymph node involvement, and patient survival in prostate cancer.
Prostate cancer tissues showed reduced ACP3 expression (odds ratio [OR] 0.30, P = 0.006), and low intracellular ACP3 expression was associated with higher Gleason grade (OR 0.44, P = 0.031), advanced tumour stage, lymph node involvement, and poorer survival. In contrast, preliminary evidence from a limited number of studies indicated that patients more frequently showed elevated ACP1 expression (hazard ratio [HR] 2.24, P < 0.001), which correlated with aggressive pathological features, including high Gleason grade (HR 3.75, P < 0.001), advanced stage, lymph node metastasis, and poor patient survival.
Acid phosphatase 3 functions as a favourable prognostic biomarker, whereas ACP1 acts as a potential negative prognostic indicator in prostate cancer. Further research is warranted to elucidate their divergent roles and support their utility in biomarker-driven risk stratification and precision oncology.

PMID:
42952235
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 29 Oct 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 7
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement