ArticleOncology letters2019
Article in Oncology letters, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Radical Prostatectomy Versus Brachytherapy for the Management of Low- and Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies Focusing on Oncological Outcomes.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2026Pooled it
- Long-Term Outcomes of Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy in Localized Prostate Cancer: A 17-Year Retrospective Analysis of a Single-Center Portuguese Cohort.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Permanent seed brachytherapy for prostate cancer: Monotherapy, combined, and salvage approaches remain effective and well-tolerated options.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2026Article
- The direct prognosis comparison ofEuropean journal of medical research · 2023Review
- Long-term prognosis and prognostic factors of brachytherapy and propensity score matched comparisons of the outcomes between brachytherapy and radical prostatectomy: a retrospective cohort study.Translational andrology and urology · 2022Article
- Comparison of the Oncological and Functional Outcomes of Brachytherapy and Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Comparison of Oncological Outcomes Between Radical Prostatectomy and Radiotherapy by Type of Radiotherapy in Elderly Prostate Cancer Patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Radical prostatectomy versus brachytherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer on oncological and functional outcomes: a meta-analysis.Translational andrology and urology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radical prostatectomy (RP) and low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (LDR) are two widely used treatment options for patients with T1c-T3a prostate cancer. In the present study, the efficacy of the two treatments was compared. A total of 429 patients who underwent either LDR (n=218) or RP (n=211) between January 2010 and June 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Biochemical relapse-free survival time (bRFS) and clinical relapse-free survival time (cRFS) were assessed. The log-rank test compared bRFS between the two modalities, and Cox regression identified factors associated with bRFS. The median follow-up time and patient age were 46.6 months and 71 years, respectively. The bRFS at 1, 2 and 5 years was 89.4, 87.2 and 79.9% for LDR, respectively, and 91.0, 82.8 and 72.2% for RP, respectively (P=0.077). The cRFS at 1, 2 and 5 years was 99.1, 97.7 and 94.9% for LDR, respectively, and 99.0, 96.2 and 94.5% for RP, respectively (P=0.630). It was indicated that LDR produced equivalent bRFS and cRFS rates compared with RP. The risk of biochemical failure (bF) was higher for the RP group compared with the LDR group in patients with a Gleason score ≤3+4 (P=0.022) or initial prostate specific antigen ≤10 ng/ml (P=0.002). Based on the univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis of all 429 patients, T stage ≥T2b was an independent predictor for bF.
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.