ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2016
[Salvage lymphadenectomy in patients with prostate cancer recurrence: A review].
Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reconsidering the role of pelvic lymph node dissection with radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer in an era of improving radiological staging techniques.World journal of urology · 2018Article
- Cancer-specific and overall survival in patients with recurrent prostate cancer who underwent salvage extended pelvic lymph node dissection.BMC urology · 2016Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSalvage extended pelvic lymph node dissection (salvage ePLND) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) biochemical recurrence is an alternative to the commonly used androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and/or chemotherapy. Small patient number, insufficient accuracy of contemporary imaging methods for lymph node relapse diagnostics, and the lack of prospective data present limiting factors for a wider application of salvage ePLND. The purpose of this publication is to review German and European data and studies on the subject of salvage ePLND and to discuss future perspectives. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe analyzed available studies up to October 2014 from Medline with the keywords "salvage lymph node dissection prostate cancer".
resultsA total of 51 publications since 1984 (up to October 2014) meeting the search criteria were found. Ten of these were studies that analyzed the results of salvage ePLND. Of these 10 studies, 6 originated from German clinics. Furthermore, among these 51 publications, there were 2 clinical case reports (1 from Germany) and 3 reviews (none from Germany).
conclusionsThe available data show insufficient evidence-based validity. There have been no prospective studies and just one multicenter study. However, single-center retrospective studies have shown promising results. Salvage ePLND leads to biochemical remission, freedom from clinical recurrence, and probably also to renewed response to ADT in patients with castration-resistant PCa. Multicenter prospective studies should be conducted in Germany (where most of the available studies have been performed). The selection of patients should be analyzed in order to identify clear selection criteria for salvage ePLND.
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.