Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33457291›Full record

ReviewTranslational andrology and urology2020

Penile sparing therapy for penile cancer.

Henry Han-I Yao, Shomik Sengupta, Justin Chee

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Translational andrology and urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Henry Han-I YaoDepartment of Urology, Eastern Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Shomik SenguptaDepartment of Urology, Eastern Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Justin CheeDepartment of Urology, Western Health, Melbourne, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Penile cancer is a rare malignancy with a reported incidence of 0.66-1.44 per 100,000 men, and a reported mortality of 0.15-0.37 per 10,000 men. Expert clinical examination and histological diagnosis from biopsy is required to determine the extent and invasion of disease, which is paramount in planning of appropriate treatment. Management of loco-regional penile cancer can be divided into management of primary tumour and management of regional lymph nodes. This review article will focus on the management of the primary penile tumour with particular focus on penile sparing therapies. The aim of primary penile tumour management is to completely remove the tumour whilst preserving as much organ function as possible. Preservation of the penis is important as it allows patients to maintain urinary and sexual function, as well as quality of life. With the majority of penile cancer confined to the glans and foreskin, most penile cancers can be managed with organ-preserving therapy. A wide variety of treatment options are available, and this review aims to describe each of the options including the reported oncological and functional outcome for the different therapies for penile cancer.

Indexed as

Penile cancerquality of liferadiotherapysexual functionsurgery

Identifiers

PMID33457291
PMCPMC7807365

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.