Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34748059›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2022

The impact of drainage pathways on the detection of nodal metastases in prostate cancer: a phase II randomized comparison of intratumoral vs intraprostatic tracer injection for sentinel node detection.

Esther M K Wit, Florian van Beurden, Gijs H Kleinjan, Nikolaos Grivas, Clarize M de Korne, Tessa Buckle, Maarten L Donswijk, Elise M Bekers, Fijs W B van Leeuwen, Henk G van der Poel

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

10 authors.

Esther M K WitDepartment of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. e.wit@nki.nl.
Florian van BeurdenDepartment of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Gijs H KleinjanDepartment of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nikolaos GrivasDepartment of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Clarize M de KorneInterventional Molecular Imaging Laboratory, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Tessa BuckleDepartment of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Maarten L DonswijkDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Elise M BekersDepartment of Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Fijs W B van LeeuwenDepartment of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Henk G van der PoelDepartment of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPrevious studies indicated that location and amount of detected sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) in prostate cancer (PCa) are influenced where SLN-tracer is deposited within the prostate. To validate whether intratumoral (IT) tracer injection helps to increase identification of tumor-positive lymph nodes (LNs) better than intraprostatic (IP) tracer injection, a prospective randomized phase II trial was performed.

methodsPCa patients with a > 5% risk of lymphatic involvement were randomized between ultrasound-guided transrectal injection of indocyanine green-[

resultsIT-injection did not result in significant difference of removed SLNs (5.0 vs 6.0, p = 0.317) and histologically positive SLNs (28 vs 22, p = 0.571). However, in IT-group, the SLN-positive nodes were 73.7% of total positive nodes compared to 37.3% in IP-group (p = 0.015). Moreover, significantly more node-positive patients were found in IT-group (42% vs 24%, p = 0.045), which did not result in worse MFS. In two patients (3.6%) from whom the IT-tracer injection only partly covered intraprostatic tumor spread, nodal metastases in ePLND without tumor-positive SNs were yielded.

conclusionsThe percentage-positive SLNs found after IT-injection were significantly higher compared to IP-injection. Significantly more node-positive patients were found using IT-injection, which did not affect MFS. IT-injection failed to detect nodal metastases from non-index satellite lesions. Therefore, we suggest to combine IT- and IP-tracer injections in men with visible tumor on imaging.

Indexed as

Prostatic NeoplasmsSentinel Lymph NodeDrainageHumansLymph NodesMaleProspective StudiesSentinel Lymph Node BiopsyFluorescenceImage-guided surgeryProstate cancerRadio-guided surgeryRobotic surgerySentinel lymph node

Identifiers

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.