Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24946001›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2014

Feasibility study of a randomised controlled trial to compare (deferred) androgen deprivation therapy and cryotherapy in men with localised radiation-recurrent prostate cancer.

M Salji, R Jones, J Paul, F Birrell, J Dixon-Hughes, C Hutchison, T E B Johansen, D Greene, N Parr, H Y Leung and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

M Salji1] Department of Urology, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK [2] Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
R Jones1] Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK [2] Cancer Research UK Glasgow Centre, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK [3] CRUK Clinical Trials Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
J Paul1] Cancer Research UK Glasgow Centre, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK [2] CRUK Clinical Trials Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
F BirrellDepartment of Urology, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK.
J Dixon-Hughes1] Cancer Research UK Glasgow Centre, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK [2] CRUK Clinical Trials Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
C Hutchison1] Cancer Research UK Glasgow Centre, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK [2] CRUK Clinical Trials Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
T E B JohansenDepartment of Urology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
D GreeneSunderland Royal Hospital, City Hospitals Sunderland, Sunderland, UK.
N ParrWirral University Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Wirral, UK.
H Y Leung1] Department of Urology, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK [2] Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK [3] Sunderland Royal Hospital, City Hospitals Sunderland, Sunderland, UK [4] Beatson Institute, Glasgow, UK.
Cryotherapy in Prostate Cancer (CROP) study team
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde · GBSunderland Royal Hospital · GBOslo University Hospital · NO

Funding

Cancer Research UK 15151Cancer Research UK 15960Cancer Research UK CRUK/10/048
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSalvage therapeutic options for biochemical failure after primary radiation-based therapy include radical prostatectomy, cryoablation, high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), brachytherapy (for post-EBRT patients) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). ADT and salvage prostate cryoablation (SPC) are two commonly considered treatment options for RRPC. However, there is an urgent need for high-quality clinical studies to support evidence-based decisions on treatment choice. Our study aims to determine the feasibility of randomising men with RRPC for treatment with ADT and SPC.

methodsThe randomised controlled trial (CROP) was developed, which incorporated protocols to assess parameters relating to cryotherapy procedures and provide training workshops for optimising patient recruitment. Analysis of data from the recruitment phase and patient questionnaires was performed.

resultsOver a period of 18 months, 39 patients were screened for eligibility. Overall 28 patients were offered entry into the trial, but only 7 agreed to randomisation. The majority reason for declining entry into the trial was an unwillingness to be randomised into the study. 'Having the chance of getting cryotherapy' was the major reason for accepting the trial. Despite difficulty in retrieving cryotherapy temperature parameters from prior cases, 9 of 11 cryotherapy centres progressed through the Cryotherapists Qualification Process (CQP) and were approved for recruiting into the CROP study.

conclusionsConveying equipoise between the two study arms for a salvage therapy was challenging. The use of delayed androgen therapy may have been seen as an inferior option. Future cohort studies into available salvage options (including prostate cryotherapy) for RRPC may be more acceptable to patients than randomisation within an RCT.

Indexed as

Androgen AntagonistsCryosurgeryFeasibility StudiesHumansMaleMulticenter Studies as TopicNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPatient Acceptance of Health CareProstatic NeoplasmsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSalvage TherapyAndrogen Antagonists

Identifiers

PMID24946001
PMCPMC4119985
OpenAlexW2027182544

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.