Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28905289›Full record

ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2018

Lymph node-positive prostate cancer after robotic prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy.

Avinash Chenam, Jaspreet S Parihar, Nora Ruel, Sumanta Pal, Yvonne Avila, Jonathan Yamzon, Clayton Lau, Bertram Yuh

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

8 authors.

Avinash ChenamDivision of Urology and Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 E. Duarte Rd, MOB L002H, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA. achennamsetty@coh.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6447-8183
Jaspreet S PariharDivision of Urology and Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 E. Duarte Rd, MOB L002H, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA.
Nora RuelDepartment of Biostatistics, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA, USA.
Sumanta PalDepartment of Medical Oncology and Experimental Therapeutics, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA, USA.
Yvonne AvilaDivision of Urology and Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 E. Duarte Rd, MOB L002H, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA.
Jonathan YamzonDivision of Urology and Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 E. Duarte Rd, MOB L002H, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA.
Clayton LauDivision of Urology and Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 E. Duarte Rd, MOB L002H, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA.
Bertram YuhDivision of Urology and Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 E. Duarte Rd, MOB L002H, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Optimal management of node-positive prostate cancer patients after prostatectomy remains a challenge. We evaluated clinically localized patients who demonstrated node positivity and identified predictors for secondary treatment. From 2010 to 2015, clinically localized prostate cancer patients who underwent robot prostatectomy with extended lymphadenectomy and node-positive disease on pathologic analysis were identified. Clinical N1, M1 or salvage cases were excluded. Patients were stratified based on secondary treatments. Kaplan-Meier method was used to determine the time to biochemical and metastatic recurrence. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify predictors for additional treatment. 145 patients (45 no additional therapy, 47 adjuvant, 53 salvage) had a median follow-up of 31.2 months. Salvage patients had higher median pre-operative prostate-specific antigen (10.8 vs. 9.7 vs. 8.2, p = 0.1), higher percentage of pathologic Gleason ≥8 (50.9 vs. 38.3% and 22.2%, p < 0.01), and higher median-positive nodes (3 vs. 1 and 1, p < 0.0001) compared to adjuvant and no treatment groups, respectively. Pathologic Gleason ≥8 (OR = 3.5, p = 0.007) and positive nodes ≥2 (OR = 3.3, p = 0.006) were associated with additional therapy. In the no treatment group, two-year estimated BCRFS was 74.3%. Two-year metastatic recurrence-free rates for no treatment, adjuvant and salvage groups were 100, 87.5, and 80.9%, respectively (p = 0.01). Observation is a viable alternative for low metastatic burden patients. In the largest series of node-positive patients from robotic prostatectomy and extended lymphadenectomy, those with pathologic Gleason ≥8 and positive lymph nodes ≥2 were more likely to receive additional treatment.

Indexed as

Prostatic NeoplasmsAgedAged, 80 and overChemotherapy, AdjuvantHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph Node ExcisionLymph NodesMaleMiddle AgedProstatectomyRetrospective StudiesRobotic Surgical ProceduresSalvage TherapyAdjuvantExtended lymph node dissectionLymph node positiveProstate cancerRobotic prostatectomySalvage

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.