ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2020
Postoperative biochemical recurrence of pathologically localized high-grade prostate cancer in adjuvant treatment-naïve patients.
Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Combination of [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate biochemical recurrence (BCR) risk in men with localized prostate cancer (PC) of pathological Gleason score (pGS) 8-10. Although such patients have low BCR-free survival (BCRFS) following radical prostatectomy (RP), they are not recommended for adjuvant radiation therapy (ART) as per current guidelines.
methodsAmong an adjuvant treatment-naïve cohort between 1995 and 2015, 1272 men were identified and categorized into group 1 [pGS7 (3 + 4) and pT3; n = 654], group 2 [pGS7 (4 + 3) and pT3; n = 408], and group 3 (pGS 8-10 and pT2; n = 210). The BCR risk of group 3 was compared with that of groups 1 and 2 who are the candidates for ART.
resultsAt a median follow-up of 60 months (interquartile range: 39-86), 432 men experienced BCR. BCRFS was lower in group 3 than in groups 1 and 2 (p < 0.001 and p = 0.021, respectively). In multivariate analysis, this association persisted and surgical margin (SM) was found to be a significant BCR predictor. Although statistically not significant, BCRFS was lower in group 3 with positive SM (PSM) than in group 2 with PSM (p = 0.101). BCRFS was significantly worse in group 3 with negative SM (NSM) than in group 1 with PSM (p = 0.038), while it was better in group 2 with PSM (p = 0.297).
conclusionLocalized high-grade PC with PSM showed lower BCRFS and that with NSM showed better BCRFS without statistical significance than locally advanced GS 7 PC with PSM that are eligible for ART.
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.