Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25708578›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Urology2015

Radiotherapy for high-risk prostate cancer.

Jahan J Mohiuddin, Brock R Baker, Ronald C Chen

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Dosimetric benefits of half-field arc in prostate cancer treatment.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. PIM kinase inhibition counters resistance to radiotherapy and chemotherapy in human prostate cancer.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jahan J MohiuddinDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Brock R BakerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Ronald C ChenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The combination of radiation treatment and long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been shown in multiple clinical trials to prolong overall survival in men with high-risk prostate cancer compared with either treatment alone. New radiation technologies enable the safe delivery of high radiation doses that improve cancer control compared with lower radiation doses. Based on the results of multiple randomized trials, clinical practice guidelines for high-risk prostate cancer recommend total radiation doses of at least 75.6 Gy, with long-term (2-3 years) ADT. Ongoing research into hypofractionated radiation treatment, whole-pelvic radiation, and combinations of radiation with novel hormonal agents could further improve cancer control and survival outcomes for patients with high-risk prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Combined Modality TherapyDose Fractionation, RadiationHumansMaleProstatic NeoplasmsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurvival AnalysisTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID25708578
OpenAlexW2037524819

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.