ArticleKorean journal of urology2013
Does the presence of hypoechoic lesions on transrectal ultrasound suggest a poor prognosis for patients with localized prostate cancer?
Article in Korean journal of urology, 2013. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to investigate the value of hypoechoic lesions on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) as a prognostic factor for patients with localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe patients consisted of 71 patients with pT2N0M0 disease following radical prostatectomy between 2002 and 2008. The group with hypoechoic lesions was labeled group 1, whereas the group without hypoechoic lesions was labeled group 2. The presence of hypoechoic lesions on preoperative TRUS was analyzed as a prognostic factor along with several parameters, including preoperative factors and pathologic factors. The biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS) rate was compared between the two groups according to the presence of hypoechoic lesions on TRUS.
resultsA total of 35 patients had hypoechoic lesions on TRUS, whereas 36 had no hypoechoic lesions. Preoperative baseline characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups. In the univariate analysis, BPFS showed significant differences according to the presence of hypoechoic lesions on TRUS and the preoperative prostate-specific antigen level. The BPFS rates over the first 24 months were 97.0% in group 1 and 97.1% in group 2; however, the difference in the BPFS rate over 48 months significantly widened to 75.3% compared with 91.7%, respectively. Despite this finding, no significant independent prognostic factor for BPFS was found on multivariate analysis in this patient cohort.
conclusionsThe presence of hypoechoic lesions on TRUS may suggest worse prognostic characteristics in pT2 prostate cancer. Further studies involving larger subject populations are needed to corroborate the significance of the presence of hypoechoic lesions as a prognostic factor.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.