Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31591870›Full record

ArticleRadiation oncology journal2019

Prognostic significance of lymphovascular invasion in patients with prostate cancer treated with postoperative radiotherapy.

Jae-Uk Jeong, Taek-Keun Nam, Ju-Young Song, Mee Sun Yoon, Sung-Ja Ahn, Woong-Ki Chung, Ick Joon Cho, Yong-Hyub Kim, Shin Haeng Cho, Seung Il Jung and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation oncology journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. World journal of urology · 2021
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Pathological stage, surgical margin and lymphovascular invasion as prognostic factors after salvage radiotherapy for post-prostatectomy relapsed prostate cancer - outcomes and optimization strategies.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

11 authors.

Jae-Uk JeongDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Hwasun, Korea.
Taek-Keun NamDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Hwasun, Korea.
Ju-Young SongDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Hwasun, Korea.
Mee Sun YoonDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Hwasun, Korea.
Sung-Ja AhnDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Hwasun, Korea.
Woong-Ki ChungDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Hwasun, Korea.
Ick Joon ChoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Hwasun, Korea.
Yong-Hyub KimDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Hwasun, Korea.
Shin Haeng ChoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Hwasun, Korea.
Seung Il JungDepartment of Urology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Hwasun, Korea.
Dong Deuk KwonDepartment of Urology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Hwasun, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo determine prognostic significance of lymphovascular invasion (LVI) in prostate cancer patients who underwent adjuvant or salvage postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) after radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIALS AND

methodsA total of 168 patients with prostate cancer received PORT after RP, with a follow-up of ≥12 months. Biochemical failure after PORT was defined as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥0.2 ng/mL after PORT or initiation of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for increasing PSA levels regardless of the value. We analyzed the clinical outcomes including survivals, failure patterns, and prognostic factors affecting the outcomes.

resultsIn total, 120 patients (71.4%) received salvage PORT after PSA levels were >0.2 ng/mL or owing to clinical failure. The 5-year biochemical failure-free survival (BCFFS), clinical failure-free survival (CFFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), overall survival, and cause-specific survival rates were 78.3%, 94.3%, 95.0%, 95.8%, and 97.3%, respectively, during a follow-up range of 12-157 months (median: 64 months) after PORT. On multivariate analysis, PSA level of ≤1.0 ng/mL at the time of receiving PORT predicted favorable BCFFS, CFFS, and DMFS. LVI predicted worse CFFS (p = 0.004) and DMFS (p = 0.015). Concurrent and/or adjuvant ADT resulted in favorable prognosis for BCFFS (p < 0.001) and CFFS (p = 0.017).

conclusionFor patients with adverse pathologic findings, PORT should be initiated as early as possible after continence recovery after RP. Even after administering PORT, LVI was an unfavorable predictive factor, and further intensive adjuvant therapy should be considered for these patients.

Indexed as

Postoperative radiotherapyProstatectomyProstate neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID31591870
PMCPMC6790794

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.