ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2013
Practice patterns in the management of prostate cancer in Spain: results from a national survey among radiation oncologists in 2009.
Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Consensus and differences in primary radiotherapy for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer in Switzerland: A survey on patterns of practice.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2015Article
- Infrastructures, treatment modalities, and workload of radiation oncology departments in Spain with special attention to prostate cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLittle is known of practice patterns on advanced prostate cancer (PC) in Spain. The study objectives were to investigate practice patterns in the management of PC and to determine the adherence to the 2007 Spanish guidelines for the management of PC. MATERIALS AND
methodsAn epidemiological, cross-sectional study was undertaken. Study-specific questionnaires were distributed to all centers with radiation oncology (RO) facilities delivering megavoltage radiation therapy (RT) in Spain (n = 108). A questionnaire evaluated diagnostic and treatment approaches to PC in low-risk and high-risk cases. And a 12-item questionnaire was used to assess guidelines adherence.
resultsResponses were obtained from 102 centers (94.0 % response rate). In the high-risk scenario, the majority of clinicians (99.0 %) chose combined modality treatment with RT and androgen deprivation (AD) and 93.0 % recommended long-term AD. External-beam RT (EBRT) doses ranging 72-76 Gy were used in 59.5 % of centers and >76 Gy was employed in 40.5 %. In the low-risk scenario, EBRT was chosen by 59.6 %, brachytherapy by 39.4 %, and active surveillance by 1 %. The consensus was high (score 5 + 4 ≥ 90 %) on 8/12 questions assessing adherence to guidelines, being high specifically on items related to RT technique, RT dose, combination of HT and RT in intermediate/high-risk patients, and prognostic factors.
conclusionsThis is the largest survey to date of Spanish RO departments dealing with PC. The study results therefore likely provide a highly reliable picture of clinical practice in Spain in this century and show how this practice is influenced by clinical evidence from randomized trials and consensus conferences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22855195What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.