Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35768883›Full record

ArticleBJU international2022

Pathological predictors of

Elisa Perry, Arpit Talwar, Kim Taubman, Michael Ng, Lih-Ming Wong, Tom R Sutherland

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJU international, 2022. 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. Impact of Clinical Factors onAdvances in radiation oncology · 2024
    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

6 authors.

Elisa PerryPacific Radiology, Christchurch, Canterbury, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-1649-5100
Arpit TalwarDepartment of Medical Imaging, St. Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Vic., Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7187-3074
Kim TaubmanDepartment of Medical Imaging, St. Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Vic., Australia.
Michael NgGenesisCare, St. Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Vic., Australia.
Lih-Ming WongDepartment of Urology, St. Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Vic., Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0490-7876
Tom R SutherlandDepartment of Medical Imaging, St. Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Vic., Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess the correlation of pathological radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen features and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) characteristics to imaging findings on subsequent PATIENTS AND

methodsRetrospective analysis of combined

resultsOf the 205 patients, 120 (58.5%) had evidence of abnormal prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) expression compatible with recurrent prostate cancer. Increasing PSA velocity (P = 0.01), International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group (P = 0.02), lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.05) and nodal positivity (P = 0.02) at the time of RP were more likely to demonstrate PSMA positivity. Multivariable logistic regression revealed a higher PSA level prior to PSMA PET/CT (P < 0.01), adjuvant radiotherapy (P = 0.09), Gleason score ≥8 (P < 0.01) and nodal positivity (P = 0.05) were all predictive of PSMA positivity.

conclusion

Indexed as

Prostate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsGallium RadioisotopesHumansMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyProstateProstatectomyRetrospective StudiesGallium RadioisotopesProstate-Specific Antigen18F-DCFPyLbiochemical recurrencehistopathologyPET/CTprostate cancerPSMA

Identifiers

PMID35768883
PMCPMC9540526

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.