Observational studyDeutsches Arzteblatt international2016
The Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer in Everyday Practice in Germany.
Observational study in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Peritoneal Flap in Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2020Trial
- Important Studies Were not Mentioned.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2025Article
- Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic on Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer.Urologia internationalis · 2025Article
- Treatment of intermediate-risk prostate cancer with active surveillance in the routine care-Long-term outcomes of a prospective noninterventional study (HAROW).Current urology · 2024Article
- [On the practice of therapy decision in locally limited prostate cancer: surgery vs. radiation-who benefits? : Allocation and results of a monocentric, cumulative long-term study].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2022Observational
- [Active surveillance-much safety, little recruitment : Is it possible to extend the indication for "intermediate-risk" prostate cancer?]Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2021Observational
- Long-term outcomes of active surveillance for clinically localized prostate cancer in a community-based setting: results from a prospective non-interventional study.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- Determinants of self-reported functional status (EPIC-26) in prostate cancer patients prior to treatment.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- Evaluation of Somatostatin and CXCR4 Receptor Expression in a Large Set of Prostate Cancer Samples Using Tissue Microarrays and Well-Characterized Monoclonal Antibodies.Translational oncology · 2020Article
- [Noninvasive treatment of organ-confined prostate cancer in elderly patients-results of the HAROW study].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2020Article
- [Studies on localized low-risk prostate cancer : Do we know enough?]Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2018Review
- Perceived Physical Strain at Work and Incidence of Prostate Cancer – a Case-Control Study in Sweden and FinlandAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2018Article
- [Treatment costs of localized prostate cancer in Germany : Economic results from the HAROW observational study].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2016Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProstate cancer is now often diagnosed in the localized, welldifferentiated stage. In the HAROW study, we investigated the care situation with respect to the various treatment options for localized prostate cancer in everyday clinical practice in Germany.
methodsStudy physicians for this prospective, multicenter observational study were recruited through the Federation of German Urologists. At six-month intervals, clinical variables were recorded (T category, prostate-specific antigen [PSA], Gleason score, d'Amico risk profile, Charlson Comorbidity Index [CCI]) and patients filled out questionnaires (QLQ-C30) regarding their indicationrelated quality of life (QoL). Covariance analysis was used to adjust for the variable distribution of patient features among the treatment groups.
resultsData from 2957 patients were available for analysis. The mean followup time was 28.4 months overall, and 47.6 months in the active surveillance (AS) group. Younger patients and patients with a CCI of 0 or 1 predominated in the AS and surgery groups; older patients and patients with a CCI of 2 or above predominated in the groups in which palliative treatment strategies such as hormone therapy (HT) and watchful waiting were applied. The HT group had the highest percentage of patients with a Gleason score of 8 or above (21.2%), while the AS group had the highest percentage of patients with a Gleason score of 6 or below (92.5%), as well as the lowest mean PSA value (5.8 ± 3.4 ng/mL) and the highest percentage of patients with a low-risk profile (82.5%). Of 468 patients in the AS group, 170 (36.3%) underwent a change of treatment strategy. After adjustment for the severity of disease, no significant difference with respect to the global quality of life was found between AS and the curative treatment options over the long term.
conclusionThe study physicians drew a clear distinction between curative and palliative treatment strategies, and the inclusion criteria for AS were largely respected. The observed preference for surgery in low-risk patients indicates overtreatment in this patient group.
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.