Trial reportThe British journal of radiology2019
Trial report in The British journal of radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in the Primary Staging of Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review of the Literature.European urology oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Incremental Impact of [Molecular imaging and biology · 2022Trial
- Application of targeted diagnosis of PSMA in the modality shift of prostate cancer diagnosis: a review.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Quantitative imaging parameters to predict the local staging of prostate cancer in intermediate- to high-risk patients.Insights into imaging · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
methods: We analysed results of 142 males with staging PSMA prior to radical prostatectomy (RP). Data collected included PSMA PET/CT, bone scan (30/142), mpMRI (112/142), and pathological T stage (pT) stage, Gleason score, surgical margins and lymph node status at RP. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was documented at staging scan, and following surgery (median 45 days (interquartile range 38-59). A PSA of < 0.03 ng ml
results: 97.9% (139/142) of males had positive intraprostatic findings on PSMA. 14.1 % (20/142) of males had further sites of extra prostatic disease identified on PSMA PET. In males with disease confined to the prostate, 82.9 % (92/111) achieved an SR, compared to 28.6 % (4/14) in males with extraprostatic disease identified (lymph node positive and distant metastatic disease) (p < 0.001). On binary logistic regression PSMA had a superior predictive value for SR than Gleason score, PSA (at time of imaging) or pT stage. MRI was less sensitive and more specific for SVI, and less sensitive for nodal involvement.
conclusion: Extraprostatic disease identified on staging pre-operative PSMA PET is independently predictive of a poor surgical response to RP, and may indicate a need for a multimodality approach to treatment. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE:: This is one of the first studies to correlate the PSMA PET's staging capacity to prostate cancer patient's outcomes to radical prostatectomy and indicates it's potential in predicting which patients will benefit from radical prostatectomy.
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.