Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27150293›Full record

Trial reportBMC cancer2016

Focal vs extended ablation in localized prostate cancer with irreversible electroporation; a multi-center randomized controlled trial.

Matthijs J V Scheltema, Willemien van den Bos, Daniel M de Bruin, Hessel Wijkstra, M Pilar Laguna, Theo M de Reijke, Jean J M C H de la Rosette

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01835977 (Multi-Center Randomized Clinical Two Arm Intervention Study Evaluating Irreversible Electroporation for the Ablation of Localized Prostate Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
8.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

NCT01835977 phase2unknown statusnot on this map

Multi-Center Randomized Clinical Two Arm Intervention Study Evaluating Irreversible Electroporation for the Ablation of Localized Prostate Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorClinical Research Office of the Endourological SocietyRan2015 to 2025Enrolled106ConditionsProstate CancerArmsIrreversible Electroporation (Nanoknife)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Focal Ablation of Prostate Cancer.Reviews in urology · 2018
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Matthijs J V ScheltemaDepartment of Urology, AMC University Hospital, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.j.scheltema@amc.nl.
Willemien van den BosDepartment of Urology, AMC University Hospital, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Daniel M de BruinDepartment of Urology, AMC University Hospital, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Hessel WijkstraDepartment of Urology, AMC University Hospital, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M Pilar LagunaDepartment of Urology, AMC University Hospital, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Theo M de ReijkeDepartment of Urology, AMC University Hospital, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jean J M C H de la RosetteDepartment of Urology, AMC University Hospital, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
University of Amsterdam · NLEindhoven University of Technology · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent surgical and ablative treatment options for prostate cancer (PCa) may result in a high incidence of (temporary) incontinence, erectile dysfunction and/or bowel damage. These side effects are due to procedure related effects on adjacent structures including blood vessels, bowel, urethra and/or neurovascular bundle. Ablation with irreversible electroporation (IRE) has shown to be effective and safe in destroying PCa cells and also has the potential advantage of sparing surrounding tissue and vital structures, resulting in less impaired functional outcomes and maintaining men's quality of life. METHODS/

designIn this randomized controlled trial (RCT) on IRE in localized PCa, 200 patients with organ-confined, unilateral (T1c-T2b) low- to intermediate-risk PCa (Gleason sum score 6 and 7) on transperineal template-mapping biopsies (TTMB) will be included. Patients will be randomized into focal or extended ablation of cancer foci with IRE. Oncological efficacy will be determined by multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound imaging if available, TTMP and Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) follow-up. Patients will be evaluated up to 5 years on functional outcomes and quality of life with the use of standardized questionnaires. DISCUSSION: There is critical need of larger, standardized RCTs evaluating long-term oncological and functional outcomes before introducing IRE and other focal therapy modalities as an accepted and safe therapeutic option for PCa. This RCT will provide important short- and long-term data and elucidates the differences between focal or extended ablation of localized, unilateral low- to intermediate-risk PCa with IRE.

trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov database registration number NCT01835977. The Dutch Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects registration number NL50791.018.14.

Indexed as

Ablation TechniquesAdultAgedBiopsyElectroporationHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingProstateProstatic NeoplasmsTreatment OutcomeAblationFocal therapyIREIrreversible electroporationLocalizedProstate cancerRandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID27150293
PMCPMC4858903
OpenAlexW2345839861

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.