Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28493044›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2017

Postoperative upgrading of prostate cancer in men ≥75 years: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Annika Herlemann, Alexander Buchner, Alexander Kretschmer, Maria Apfelbeck, Christian G Stief, Christian Gratzke, Stefan Tritschler

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Defining Undertreatment and Overtreatment in Older Adults With Cancer: A Scoping Literature Review.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Annika HerlemannDepartment of Urology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Alexander BuchnerDepartment of Urology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Alexander KretschmerDepartment of Urology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Maria ApfelbeckDepartment of Urology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Christian G StiefDepartment of Urology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Christian GratzkeDepartment of Urology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Stefan TritschlerDepartment of Urology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377, Munich, Germany. stefan.tritschler@med.uni-muenchen.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeGleason score upgrading should be considered when indicating surgery in prostate cancer (PCa) patients. In elderly patients, definitive treatment of low-risk PCa must be weighed with the risks of overtreatment. Our aim was to evaluate rates of Gleason score upgrading in patients ≥75 years undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) for localized PCa and to identify predictors associated with upgrading.

methods3296 patients undergoing RP were retrospectively evaluated and categorized into age groups: <70 years (n = 2971) vs. ≥75 years (n = 325). We analyzed prostate-specific antigen (PSA), biopsy counts, Gleason score, pathologic T- and N-stage, and surgical margin. Propensity score matching was performed to compare rates of up- and downgrading on surgical specimen using the new five-tier pathologic grading system. Logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of upgrading.

resultsPreoperatively, patients ≥75 years had higher PSA (8.8 vs. 7.3 ng/mL) and lower proportion of grade group 1 (Gleason score 6) at biopsy (29.2 vs. 47.9%; both p < 0.001) compared to patients <70 years. At RP, patients ≥75 years were more likely to have extraprostatic disease (50 vs. 30%) and lower rates of grade group 1 (14.1 vs. 34.8%; both p < 0.001). Postoperative downgrading was similar (15.1 vs. 19.5%). However, patients ≥75 years had higher rates of postoperative upgrading (46.6 vs. 27.9%; p < 0.001). Age ≥75 years, higher PSA levels at RP, and an increased number of positive biopsy cores were associated with upgrading.

conclusionsPatients ≥75 years not only demonstrated higher rates of advanced disease but more frequent upgrading on RP specimen. Age ≥75 years, higher PSA levels at RP, and an increased number of positive biopsy cores were predictive for upgrading. The increased risk of upgrading should be taken into consideration when discussing optimal treatment for this specific cohort.

Indexed as

ProstateProstatic NeoplasmsAgedBiopsyGermanyHumansMaleMargins of ExcisionNeoplasm GradingNeoplasm StagingPostoperative CarePropensity ScoreProstatectomyProstate-Specific AntigenRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentProstate-Specific AntigenElderlyGleason scoreGrade groupProstate cancerRadical prostatectomyUpgrading

Identifiers

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.