Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31297315›Full record

ArticleAsian journal of urology2019

Practice patterns and outcomes of equivocal bone scans for patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer: Results from SEARCH.

Brian T Hanyok, Mary M Everist, Lauren E Howard, Amanda M De Hoedt, William J Aronson, Matthew R Cooperberg, Christopher J Kane, Christopher L Amling, Martha K Terris, Stephen J Freedland

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Asian journal of urology, 2019. 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. The Value ofDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    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

10 authors.

Brian T HanyokUrology Section, Department of Surgery, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Mary M EveristUrology Section, Department of Surgery, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Lauren E HowardUrology Section, Department of Surgery, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Amanda M De HoedtUrology Section, Department of Surgery, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
William J AronsonUrology Section, Department of Surgery, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Greater Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Matthew R CooperbergDepartments of Urology and Epidemiology & Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Christopher J KaneDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of California at San Diego Medical Center, San Diego, CA, USA.
Christopher L AmlingDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Martha K TerrisUrology Section, Division of Surgery, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Augusta, GA, USA.
Stephen J FreedlandUrology Section, Department of Surgery, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.

Funding

Midcareer Investigator AwardK24CA160653 · NCI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI FREEDLAND, STEPHEN JAY · 2012 to 2016
$877k
NCI NIH HHS K24 CA160653
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo review follow-up imaging after equivocal bone scans in men with castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and examine the characteristics of equivocal bone scans that are associated with positive follow-up imaging.

methodsWe identified 639 men from five Veterans Affairs Hospitals with a technetium-99m bone scan after CRPC diagnosis, of whom 99 (15%) had equivocal scans. Men with equivocal scans were segregated into "high-risk" and "low-risk" subcategories based upon wording in the bone scan report. All follow-up imaging (bone scans, computed tomography [CT], magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], and X-rays) in the 3 months after the equivocal scan were reviewed. Variables were compared between patients with a positive

resultsOf 99 men with an equivocal bone scan, 43 (43%) received at least one follow-up imaging test, including 32/82 (39%) with low-risk scans and 11/17 (65%) with high-risk scans (

conclusionWhile 19% of all men who received follow-up imaging had positive follow-up imaging, only 9% of those with a low-risk equivocal bone scan had metastases versus 45% of those with high-risk. These preliminary findings, if confirmed in larger studies, suggest follow-up imaging tests for low-risk equivocal scans can be delayed while high-risk equivocal scans should receive follow-up imaging.

Indexed as

Bone scanCastration-resistant prostate cancerEquivocal test resultFollow-up imagingNeoplasm metastasisRadiology report

Identifiers

PMID31297315
PMCPMC6595156

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.