ReviewThe oncologist2013
Unmet needs in the prediction and detection of metastases in prostate cancer.
Review in The oncologist, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Whole-Body MRI vs. PET/CT for the Detection of Bone Metastases in Patients With Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Prediction of bone or lung metastasis in prostate cancer using machine learning: a SEER-based study with external validation.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Observational
- Consensus statements on the management of clinically localized prostate cancer from the Hong Kong Urological Association and the Hong Kong Society of Uro-Oncology.BJU international · 2019Review
- Imaging features of Paget's disease onAmerican journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2017Article
- Imaging Biomarkers in Immunotherapy.Biomarkers in cancer · 2016Review
- ¹⁸F-DCFBC PET/CT for PSMA-Based Detection and Characterization of Primary Prostate Cancer.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2015Article
- Molecular imaging of urogenital diseases.Seminars in nuclear medicine · 2014Review
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 at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The therapeutic landscape for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer is rapidly evolving, especially for those patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CPRC). Despite advances in therapy options, the diagnostic landscape has remained relatively static, with few guidelines or reviews addressing the optimal timing or methodology for the radiographic detection of metastatic disease. Given recent reports indicating a substantial proportion of patients with CRPC thought to be nonmetastatic (M0) are in fact metastatic (M1), there is now a clear opportunity and need for improvement in detection practices. Herein, we discuss the current status of predicting the presence of metastatic disease, with a particular emphasis on the detection of the M0 to M1 transition. In addition, we review current data on newer imaging technologies that are changing the way metastases are detected. Whether earlier detection of metastatic disease will ultimately improve patient outcomes is unknown, but given that the therapeutic options for those with metastatic and nonmetastatic CPRC vary, there are considerable implications of how and when metastases are detected.
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.