Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35047770›Full record

ArticleBMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies2019

The Precision Prostatectomy: an IDEAL Stage 0, 1 and 2a Study.

Akshay Sood, Wooju Jeong, Kanika Taneja, Firas Abdollah, Isaac Palma-Zamora, Sohrab Arora, Nilesh Gupta, Mani Menon

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07348367 (A Randomized Comparison of Radical Prostatectomy and Precision Prostatectomy in Low- and Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancers.), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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.

NCT07348367 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

A Randomized Comparison of Radical Prostatectomy and Precision Prostatectomy in Low- and Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancers.

TypeinterventionalSponsorHenry Ford Health SystemRan2026 to 2028Enrolled160ConditionsProstatectomyArmsRadical Prostatectomy, Precision Prostatectomy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Innovation in surgery.BMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies · 2019
    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 1 institution in 1 country.

Akshay SoodVattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5415-9901
Wooju JeongVattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
Kanika TanejaDepartment of Pathology, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
Firas AbdollahVattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
Isaac Palma-ZamoraVattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
Sohrab AroraVattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
Nilesh GuptaDepartment of Pathology, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
Mani MenonVattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
Henry Ford Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed to develop a preclinical model of prostate cancer (CaP) for studying focal/hemiablation of the prostate (IDEAL stage 0), and to use the information from the stage 0 investigation to design a novel focal surgical treatment approach-the precision prostatectomy (IDEAL stage 1/2a).

methodsThe IDEAL stage 0 study included simulation of focal/hemiablation in whole-mount prostate specimens obtained from 100 men who had undergone radical prostatectomies, but met the criteria for focal/hemiablation. The IDEAL stage 1/2a was a prospective, single-arm, Institutional Review Board-approved study of precision prostatectomy undertaken in eight men, who met the predetermined criteria. Criteria for both stages included (1) prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≤15 ng/mL, (2) stage ≤cT2, (3) dominant unilateral lesion with Gleason ≤4+3 with any number of cores or % cores involved ipsilaterally on transrectal biopsy, (4) no primary Gleason ≥4 contralaterally on transrectal biopsy, and (5) preoperative erectile function score (International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF)-5) of ≥17 (out of 25) without PDE-5i (applicable only to the stage 1/2a study participants). Feasibility and safety of the precision prostatectomy technique, and short-term urinary, sexual and oncological outcomes were studied.

resultsAnalysis of whole-mount specimens in the 100 men showed an index lesion (>1 cm in diameter) in all. Ninety-eight men had satellite lesions smaller than 0.5 cm∧3 in volume-46 on the side of the dominant lesions and 52 in the contralateral lobe. If the men in this modeling cohort had undergone focal ablation with a 5-10 mm untreated margin, all except one would have had at least Gleason 6 residual cancer. If they had undergone hemiablation with no untreated tissue on the ablated side, 56 men would have had residual cancer on the contralateral side, of whom 21 would have had clinically significant cancer (Gleason 7 or higher). If these men had undergone precision prostatectomy, with preservation of 5-10 mm of tissue on the non-dominant side, 10% and 4% would have had Gleason 3+4 and Gleason 4+3 disease left behind, respectively. For the stage 1/2a study, the median (IQR) age, PSA and IIEF-5 scores at the time of surgery were 54 (52-57) years, 4.4 (3.8-6.1) ng/mL and 24 (23-25), respectively. All eight patients were continent and sexually active at 12 months with a median IIEF-5 score of 21 (out of 25). At 24-30 months from surgery, the median PSA was 0.2 (range 0.1-0.7) ng/mL. Six men had undergone follow-up protocol biopsies, two, with undetectable PSA, had refused. Two men had residual Gleason 3+3 cancer, with PSA of 0.7 and 0.4 ng/mL, and remain on active surveillance. No man has undergone secondary whole-gland therapy.

conclusionsExamination of whole-mount radical prostatectomy specimens in men who fit the conventional criteria of focal/hemiablation showed that approximately 21%-68% of men would have clinically significant CaP in the untreated tissue. In a small development cohort, precision prostatectomy was technically feasible, with excellent postoperative functional recovery. At 30 months of follow-up, no patient had clinically significant residual cancer or required secondary treatment. Pending long-term follow-up, a risk-stratified surgical approach may avoid whole-gland therapy and preserve erectile function in the majority of men with intermediate-risk CaP.

Indexed as

erectile dysfunctionfocal therapyminimally invasive surgical proceduresprostate cancerprostatectomyroboticsurinary incontinence

Identifiers

PMID35047770
PMCPMC8647607
OpenAlexW2969671137

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.