Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33443481›Full record

ReviewCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2021

Do androgen-directed therapies improve outcomes in prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ameeta L Nayak, Anathea S Flaman, Ranjeeta Mallick, Luke T Lavallée, Dean A Fergusson, Ilias Cagiannos, Chris Morash, Rodney H Breau

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. AR and PI3K/AKT in Prostate Cancer: A Tale of Two Interconnected Pathways.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  5. Targeting the androgen receptor axis at the time of RP.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2021
    Article
  6. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ameeta L NayakFaculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Anathea S Flaman
Ranjeeta MallickClinical Epidemiology Program, Centre for Practice Changing Research, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Luke T LavalléeFaculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Dean A FergussonFaculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Ilias CagiannosDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Chris MorashDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Rodney H BreauFaculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
University of Ottawa · CAOttawa Hospital · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionApproximately 50% of patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer are treated with radical prostatectomy (RP). While some men will be cured with surgery alone, a substantial proportion will experience cancer recurrence. Androgen-directed therapy (ADT) is an effective adjuvant therapy for patients treated with prostate radiation. Comparatively, the efficacy of ADT in surgical patients has not been well-studied.

methodsA systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception to July 2020 was performed. Randomized trials comparing ADT with RP vs. prostatectomy alone in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were included. Neoadjuvant ADT and adjuvant ADT interventions were assessed separately. The primary outcomes were cancer recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). Pathological outcomes following neoadjuvant ADT were also evaluated.

resultsFifteen randomized trials met eligibility criteria; 11 evaluated neoadjuvant ADT (n=2322) and four evaluated adjuvant ADT (n=5205). Neoadjuvant ADT (three months of treatment) did not improve RFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-1.11) or OS (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.62-2.41). Neoadjuvant ADT significantly decreased the risk of positive surgical margins (relative risk [RR] 0.48, 95% CI 0.41-0.56) and extraprostatic tumor extension (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.64-0.89). Adjuvant ADT improved RFS (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.45-0.93) but did not improve OS (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.84-1.24).

conclusionsNeoadjuvant ADT causes a pathological downstaging of prostate tumors but has not been found to delay cancer recurrence nor extend survival. Few studies have evaluated adjuvant ADT. Trials are needed to determine the benefits and harms of intermediate- or long-term adjuvant ADT for RP patients.

Identifiers

PMID33443481
PMCPMC8418268
OpenAlexW3120193767

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.