Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32051551›Full record

ReviewProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2020

Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer in the era of routine multi-parametric MRI.

M J Connor, M A Gorin, H U Ahmed, R Nigam

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06929065 (Randomized Prospective Trial of Focal Therapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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.

NCT06929065 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Randomized Prospective Trial of Focal Therapy (HIFU vs Cryo) for Early Stage Unifocal Prostate Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorKaiser PermanenteRan2023 to 2025Enrolled50ConditionsProstate Cancer, Prostate Cancer Stage I, Prostate Cancer Stage II, High Intensity Focused UltrasoundArmsHIFU vs Cryoablation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Landmarks in the evolution of prostate biopsy.Nature reviews. Urology · 2023
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

M J ConnorImperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Hospital, London, W6 8RF, UK. m.connor@imperial.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4033-7508
M A GorinThe James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
H U AhmedImperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Hospital, London, W6 8RF, UK.
R NigamRoyal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7XX, UK.
Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GBJohns Hopkins University · USUniversity College Hospital · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust 204998/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProstate cancer focal therapy aims to minimize the side-effects of whole gland treatments, such as radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy without compromising oncological efficacy. However, concerns exist regarding the multifocal nature of prostate cancer and the lack of long-term oncological data for this form of treatment. In recent years, the routine adoption of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) of the prostate has improved our ability to select candidates for focal therapy and to accurately deliver this form of prostate cancer treatment.

methodsWe performed a review of the literature to provide a summary of the oncological and functional outcomes of men receiving primary prostate focal therapy. Furthermore, we discuss the impact of the routine implementation of mpMRI as part of the initial prostate cancer diagnostic pathway on the selection of candidates and delivery of focal therapy. Finally, we summarize knowledge gaps in the field and highlight active clinical trials in this arena.

resultsPrimary focal therapy involves the application of one of a number of energies that ablate tissue, such as cryotherapy and high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU). Success is principally dependent on highly accurate patient selection and disease localization underpinned in large part by the routine integration of pre-biopsy mpMRI. Prospective medium-term follow-up data for primary HIFU and cryotherapy for men with intermediate-risk disease have shown acceptable cancer control with low risk of side effects and complications. Additional research is needed to clearly define an appropriate follow-up approach and to guide the management of in- and out-of-field recurrences. Multiple comparative trials with randomization against standard care are currently underway in men with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer.

conclusionThe widespread adoption of prostate mpMRI has led to improved disease localization, enabling the performance of focal therapy as a viable treatment strategy for men with low volume intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionHigh-Intensity Focused Ultrasound AblationHumansMaleMultiparametric Magnetic Resonance ImagingPrognosisProstatic Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID32051551
OpenAlexW3005602963

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.