Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31326500›Full record

ArticleEuropean urology oncology2020

Treatment Facility Volume and Survival in Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer.

Shreyas S Joshi, Elizabeth R Handorf, Danielle Sienko, Matthew Zibelman, Robert G Uzzo, Alexander Kutikov, Eric M Horwitz, Marc C Smaldone, Daniel M Geynisman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European urology oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Associations of Healthcare Affordability, Availability, and Accessibility with Quality Treatment Metrics in Patients with Ovarian Cancer.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

9 authors.

Shreyas S JoshiDivision of Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Electronic address: Shreyas.joshi@fccc.edu.
Elizabeth R HandorfDepartment of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Danielle SienkoDornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Matthew ZibelmanDepartment of Hematology/Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Robert G UzzoDivision of Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Alexander KutikovDivision of Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Eric M HorwitzDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Marc C SmaldoneDivision of Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Daniel M GeynismanDepartment of Hematology/Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Funding

WORD PROCESSING CENTER--COREP30CA006927 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI Margaret von Mehren · 1985 to 2026
$138.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA006927
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite improvements in medical management of advanced prostate cancer (aPC), it continues to be a leading cause of cancer death in men. Contemporary management of men with aPC is complex and requires resources to be more readily available at high-volume facilities.

objectiveTo determine the relationship between facility volume and survival in men with aPC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsThe National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried from 2004 to 2013 for aPC, defined as T4, N+, or M+ disease, identifying 64815 patients. Six predefined patient cohorts were evaluated. Cohort "A" included all patients with aPC. "B" cohorts included only M0 patients. "C" cohorts included only M1 patients. Facilities were divided into quartiles based on median treatment volume (patients/yr).

interventionDiagnosis and management of aPC at an NCDB-reporting facility. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall survival (OS) was assessed as a function of facility volume. Multivariable Cox regression models were fitted. Cox regressions using natural cubic splines were used to test for nonlinear relationships between volume and OS. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: OS improved as facility volume increased (top quartile vs bottom quartile, hazard ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.77-0.88, p<0.001) and was consistent across patient cohorts. Spline models demonstrate a continuous decrease in hazard of death as volume increases. Limitations include the retrospective analysis and a lack of precise treatment information.

conclusionsIn this retrospective analysis of nearly 65000 men who presented with aPC, we demonstrate an association between higher facility volume and improvements in OS. This OS advantage persisted with similar magnitudes of effect after narrowing the cohorts by disease and treatment characteristics. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this retrospective review of the National Cancer Database, we analyzed the association between treatment facility volume and survival in men who are diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer. We found that survival improved as volume increased, indicating a possible imbalance of resources and expertise that favors higher-volume facilities.

Indexed as

Cancer Care FacilitiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedProstatic NeoplasmsSurvival AnalysisCancer survivalFacility volumeProstate cancer

Identifiers

PMID31326500
PMCPMC7649050

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.