ArticleDer Urologe. Ausg. A2020
[Noninvasive treatment of organ-confined prostate cancer in elderly patients-results of the HAROW study].
Article in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNoninvasive treatment options such as active surveillance (AS), watchful waiting (WW), and hormone deprivation therapy (HT) are particularly important in elderly patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa).
objectivesWe examine the use of these noninvasive treatment options in the everyday care in a cohort of patients ≥70 years old. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn the HAROW study, the treatment of localized PCa under everyday conditions is investigated. The only inclusion criterion was newly diagnosed organ-confined PCa (≤cT2c). In AS, WW, and HT patients, we compared initial tumor and patient characteristics, follow-up examinations and changes of therapy.
resultsOf 457 patients ≥70 years, 210 chose AS, 160 HT, and 87 WW. Observation times were 6.3 years (AS), 7.5 years (HT), and 7.0 years (WW). AS patients (73.2 years) were younger than WW (76.0 years) and HT patients (76.9 years) and had a higher proportion of low-risk tumors (80%) versus WW (31%) and HT (19%). A change of therapy was observed in 47.1% of AS, 17.2% of WW and 13.1% of HT patients. Metastasis occurred in 1.0% of AS, 4.6% of WW, and 6.9% of HT patients. Overall survival was 94.3% for AS, 90.8% for WW and 81.9% for HT. Within the first 28.4 months, the mean number of PSA determinations did not differ between AS and WW (6.1 vs. 5.2; p = 0.09); a rebiopsy was performed in 37.6% of AS, 11.4% of WW, and 17% of HT patients.
conclusionsThe allocation to curative and palliative strategies should be made according to patient and tumor characteristics by definition. Palliative procedures may represent concepts in older patients who initially chose a curative AS strategy.
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.