ArticleCentral European journal of urology2021
Androgen deprivation monotherapy usage in non-metastatic prostate cancer: results from eight European countries.
Article in Central European journal of urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influences on androgen deprivation therapy prescribing before surgery in high-risk prostate cancer.BJUI compass · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this study was to investigate the attitudes towards use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) as monotherapy for localized or locally advanced prostate cancer (PC). MATERIAL AND
methodsA survey using a 28-item, structured, quantitative questionnaire about the management of patients with PC was conducted in eight European countries between February and May 2018. Survey recipients were selected from a private database of healthcare providers.
resultsOverall, 375 physicians completed the survey (response rate, 58%). Participants were urologists (71.2%) or medical oncologists (28.8%), with a mean practice duration of 19.9 years and with university hospital or cancer center (41.6%), non-teaching hospital (38.4%) or private-sector clinic (20.0%) affiliations. Median proportions of physicians considering ADT as monotherapy to treat patients with PC in different risk groups varied between countries, but overall were: high/very high-risk, 60%; intermediate-risk, 30%; low-risk, 7.5%. The use of ADT monotherapy in the different risk groups also varied by medical specialty and type of affiliation. Proportions of participants applying different target thresholds for testosterone (T) levels also varied by country, but overall were: <50 ng/dL, 29.9%; <32 ng/dL, 4.8%; <20 ng/dL, 54.3%; castration but no specific target, 11%. More than half of participants (58.7%) determined target T levels only when prostate-specific antigen level was increased.
conclusionsOur multinational survey provides evidence that PC management varies across European countries and with clinical context, and frequently diverges from European Association of Urology (EAU) - European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) - European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) - International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines. Strategies for effective implementation of evidence-based recommendations in clinical practice may be needed to optimize patient outcomes.
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.