Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32431511›Full record

ReviewOncoTargets and therapy2020

Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer: Current Perspective on the Evolving Therapeutic Landscape.

Mary E Hall, Heather L Huelster, Amy N Luckenbaugh, Aaron A Laviana, Kirk A Keegan, Zachary Klaassen, Kelvin A Moses, Christopher J D Wallis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in OncoTargets and therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

8 authors.

Mary E HallDepartment of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2096-7337
Heather L HuelsterDepartment of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5411-3148
Amy N LuckenbaughDepartment of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Aaron A LavianaDepartment of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Kirk A KeeganDepartment of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Zachary KlaassenDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA, USA.
Kelvin A MosesDepartment of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Christopher J D WallisDepartment of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5990-4026

Funding

Vanderbilt Clinical Oncology Research Career Development ProgramK12CA090625 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI Debra L. Friedman, Paula Jill Hurley · 2001 to 2026
$16.9M
NCI NIH HHS K12 CA090625
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe treatment landscape for patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) has changed dramatically in the past five years, despite little change in the preceding 20 years. Such rapid change can make it difficult for clinicians to remain abreast of the current literature and synthesize the relevant data to inform evidence-based treatment decisions. METHODOLOGY: We performed a narrative, comprehensive review of treatment options for patients with mHSPC as of December 31, 2019. Specifically, we focused on phase II and III randomized controlled trials assessing the role of chemotherapy, novel androgen axis targeting agents, local-(prostate) directed therapy, and metastasis-directed therapy.

resultsThe data support a survival benefit with the addition of four different agents to androgen deprivation among men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer-docetaxel, abiraterone acetate, enzalutamide, and apalutamide. While not directly compared, the efficacy of these agents appears similar. That said, there are differences in their toxicity profiles and notable differences in cost between agents. Although analyses encompassing men with low- and high-volume metastases failed to demonstrate a significant survival benefit for radiotherapy treatment to the prostate, new data demonstrates a benefit for men with low-volume metastatic disease. Ongoing trials will assess whether this applies to local surgical treatment. Similarly, metastasis-directed therapy appears beneficial among carefully selected patients.

conclusionTreatment options for patients with mHSPC are rapidly changing following years of stagnation. A number of systemic therapies offer benefit without significant clinical differences between them. The role for local treatment of the prostate as well as metastatic sites continues to evolve.

Indexed as

abirateroneapalutamidedocetaxelenzalutamideprostate cancer

Identifiers

PMID32431511
PMCPMC7201221

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.