ArticleDer Urologe. Ausg. A2015
[Patterns of care of patients with localized prostate cancer in Germany: a health care study with focus on active surveillance].
Article in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Treatment mapping of prostate cancer in DVPZ prostate centers in Germany].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo date, evidence on active surveillance (AS) is restricted to protocol-based studies and the current practice pattern outside medical centers is unknown.
objectivesThe goal of this work was to capture the current treatment pattern of AS for localized prostate cancer (PCa) in patients managed by office-based urologists in Germany. MATERIALS AND
methodsOur cohort consisted of 361 patients included in the AS arm of the HAROW (Hormonal Treatment, Active Surveillance, Radiation Therapy, OP, Watchful Waiting) study, an observational health service study in Germany. Descriptive characteristics and active-treatment-free survival (ATFS), surgical outcomes, and triggers for active treatment were assessed.
resultsCurrently, only 15% of all patients with localized PCa were treated with AS. At baseline, 83% and 58% of all AS patients met the Chism and PRIAS low-risk criteria, respectively. After a median follow-up of 24 months, no systemic progression was observed, 5 patients died of non-disease-specific causes and active treatment was delivered in 20.5% of all patients. Triggers for active therapy were progression at biopsy (42%), rise in prostate-specific antigen level (27%), medical advice (16%) and patient's preference (10%), respectively.
conclusionOur short-term results indicate that - in the hands of office-based urologists - active surveillance might represent a feasible treatment option for patients with localized PCa. The majority of patients were free of active treatment 2 years after AS initiation. Generally accepted inclusion and progression criteria are lacking and should be developed in order to facilitate and standardize AS in patients with low-risk PCa.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25391440What 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.