Observational studyMedicine2020
Treating the primary in low burden metastatic prostate cancer: Where do we stand?
Observational study in Medicine, 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, 2 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
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
abstractOn the basis of endocrine therapy for patients with low burden metastatic prostate cancer (LBMP), the clinical efficacy and quality of life were compared between prostate-only directed radiotherapy (PODT) and prostate and metastasis radiotherapy (PMRT).From November 2009 to November 2015, total 91 patients newly diagnosed with LBMP were retrospectively analyzed, of which 52 patients received PODT and 39 patients received PMRT. The biochemical failure free interval (IBF), prostate specific survival (PCSS), and overall survival (OS) time were compared between the 2 groups, and expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) scale was used to evaluate the difference in quality of life between the 2 groups.The median IBF of the PODT group was 31 months, which was significantly lower than the 39 months of the PMRT group (P < .05); the 5-year OS and PCSS were 58.9%, 65.3% in PODT group, and 58.9%, 71.79% in PMRT group, respectively. There was no significant between the 2 groups (P > .05); the side effects of acute radiotherapy in PMRT group were significantly higher than PODT group (P < .05), especially in bone marrow suppression and gastrointestinal reactions; The scores of urinary system function and intestinal system function in PMRT group were significantly higher than PODT group at the end of radiotherapy, 3 months after radiotherapy, and 6 months after radiotherapy (P < .05). The score of sexual function in PMRT group was significantly lower than that in PODT group after radiotherapy (P < .05), and higher than that in PORT group at other follow-up time points (P < .05). The hormone function was decreased at each follow-up time point in 2 groups, and there was no significant difference between the 2 groups (P > .05).Patients with LBMP receiving PMRT can improve IBF, but cannot increase PCSS and OS, and increase the incidence of acute radiation injury.
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.