ArticleInternational journal of clinical oncology2022
Extent of pelvic lymph node dissection improves early oncological outcomes for patients with high-risk prostate cancer without lymph node involvement after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.
Article in International journal of clinical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reevaluating the therapeutic role of extended lymph node dissection in the era of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparison of oncological outcomes between extended and no pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with high- or very high-risk prostate cancer: a multi-institutional study.Prostate international · 2024Article
- Current status and therapeutic value of extended pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.Prostate international · 2024Review
- Article
- The survival benefit of different lymph node yields in radical prostatectomy for pN1M0 prostate cancer patients: Implications from a population-based study.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe investigated the effect of the extent of pelvic lymph node dissection (LND) on biochemical recurrence (BCR) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) without lymph node involvement (LNI) treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed data from 378 patients who underwent RARP with LND at our hospital between October 2010 and June 2019. The BCR-free survival rate was determined using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and Cox regression analysis was used to investigate BCR prognostic factors. The total score calculated from the D'Amico risk classification and the percentage of positive biopsy cores were used for analysis. Patients were classified into 3 BCR risk groups (low risk: 0-3 points, intermediate risk: 4-5 points, and high risk: 6-8 points).
resultsLimited LND was performed in 161 patients (42.6%), extended LND in 217 patients (57.4%), and BCR was confirmed in 66 patients (17.5%) after RARP. Both univariate and multivariate analyses showed no significant difference in the association between the extent of LND and BCR. The Kaplan-Meier curve for BCR generated using our risk classification for patients with PCa without LNI showed no significant association between the extent of LND and BCR in the low-risk group (p = 0.790). A significantly improved BCR-free survival was observed in the extended LND group among patients with PCa at intermediate risk or higher (p < 0.05).
conclusionAccording to our risk classification, BCR may be less likely to occur when extended LND is performed during RARP for patients with localized PCa at intermediate risk or higher.
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.