Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33048258›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2021

No detrimental effect of a positive family history on postoperative upgrading and upstaging in men with low risk and favourable intermediate-risk prostate cancer: implications for active surveillance.

Kathleen Herkommer, Nikola Maier, Donna P Ankerst, Stefan Schiele, Jürgen E Gschwend, Valentin H Meissner

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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.

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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kathleen HerkommerDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Strasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Nikola MaierDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Strasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Donna P AnkerstDepartment of Mathematics and Life Sciences, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Stefan SchieleDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Strasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Jürgen E GschwendDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Strasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Valentin H MeissnerDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Strasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. valentin.meissner@tum.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7679-3658
TUM Klinikum · DETechnical University of Munich · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess whether a first-degree family history or a fatal family history of prostate cancer (PCa) are associated with postoperative upgrading and upstaging among men with low risk and favourable intermediate-risk (FIR) PCa and to provide guidance on clinical decision making for active surveillance (AS) in this patient population.

methodsParticipants in the German Familial Prostate Cancer database diagnosed from 1994 to 2019 with (1) low risk (clinical T1c-T2a, biopsy Gleason Grade Group (GGG) 1, PSA < 10 ng/ml), (2) Gleason 6 FIR (clinical T1c-T2a, GGG 1, PSA 10-20 ng/ml), and (3) Gleason 3 + 4 FIR (clinical T1c-T2a, GGG 2, PSA < 10 ng/ml) PCa who were subsequently treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) were analysed for upgrading, defined as postoperative GGG 3 tumour or upstaging, defined as pT3-pT4 or pN1 disease at RP. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess whether PCa family history was associated with postoperative upgrading or upstaging.

resultsAmong 4091 men who underwent RP, mean age at surgery was 64.4 (SD 6.7) years, 24.7% reported a family history, and 3.4% a fatal family history. Neither family history nor fatal family history were associated with upgrading or upstaging at low risk, Gleason 6 FIR, and Gleason 3 + 4 FIR PCa patients.

conclusionResults from the current study indicated no detrimental effect of family history on postoperative upgrading or upstaging. Therefore, a positive family history or fatal family history of PCa in FIR PCa patients should not be a reason to refrain from AS in men otherwise suitable.

Indexed as

Watchful WaitingAgedHumansMaleMedical History TakingMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingNeoplasm StagingPostoperative PeriodProspective StudiesProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsRisk AssessmentActive surveillanceFamily historyFatal family historyFavourable intermediate-risk prostate cancerUpgradingUpstaging

Identifiers

PMID33048258
PMCPMC8332649
OpenAlexW3092611955

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.