Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35869497›Full record

ArticleTrials2022

NeuroSAFE PROOF: study protocol for a single-blinded, IDEAL stage 3, multi-centre, randomised controlled trial of NeuroSAFE robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy versus standard robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in men with localized prostate cancer.

Eoin Dinneen, Jack Grierson, Ricardo Almeida-Magana, Rosie Clow, Aiman Haider, Clare Allen, Daniel Heffernan-Ho, Alex Freeman, Tim Briggs, Senthil Nathan and 18 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03317990 (A Single Blinded, IDEAL Stage 3, Multi-Centre, Randomised Controlled Trial to Assess NeuroSAFE Robotic Assisted Radical Prostatectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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.

NCT03317990 naactive not recruitingnot on this map

A Single Blinded, IDEAL Stage 3, Multi-Centre, Randomised Controlled Trial to Assess NeuroSAFE Robotic Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) vs Standard Robotic Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) in Men With Prostate Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity College, LondonRan2018 to 2027Enrolled407ConditionsProstate CancerArmsNeuroSAFE procedure, Standard RARP
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

28 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Eoin DinneenDivision of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK. eoin.dinneen@nhs.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4309-3257
Jack GriersonDivision of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Ricardo Almeida-MaganaDivision of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Rosie ClowDivision of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Aiman HaiderUniversity College Hospital London, Department of Histopathology, 235 Euston Road, Bristol, NW1 2BU, UK.
Clare AllenUniversity College Hospital London, Department of Urology, Westmoreland Street Hospital, 6-18 Westmoreland Street, W1G 8PH, London, UK.
Daniel Heffernan-HoUniversity College Hospital London, Department of Urology, Westmoreland Street Hospital, 6-18 Westmoreland Street, W1G 8PH, London, UK.
Alex FreemanUniversity College Hospital London, Department of Histopathology, 235 Euston Road, Bristol, NW1 2BU, UK.
Tim BriggsUniversity College Hospital London, Department of Urology, Westmoreland Street Hospital, 6-18 Westmoreland Street, W1G 8PH, London, UK.
Senthil NathanUniversity College Hospital London, Department of Urology, Westmoreland Street Hospital, 6-18 Westmoreland Street, W1G 8PH, London, UK.
Susan MallettDivision of Medicine, University College London, Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, Sheffield, W1W 7JN, UK.
Chris Brew-GravesDivision of Medicine, University College London, Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, Sheffield, W1W 7JN, UK.
Nicola MuirheadDivision of Medicine, University College London, Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, Sheffield, W1W 7JN, UK.
Norman R WilliamsDivision of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Elena PizzoDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, Glasgow, WC1E 7HB, UK.
Raj PersadNorth Bristol Hospitals Trust, Department of Urology, Southmead Hospital, Southmead Lane, Westbury-on-Trym, Bristol, BS10 5NB, UK.
Jon AningNorth Bristol Hospitals Trust, Department of Urology, Southmead Hospital, Southmead Lane, Westbury-on-Trym, Bristol, BS10 5NB, UK.
Lyndsey JohnsonNorth Bristol Hospitals Trust, Department of Urology, Southmead Hospital, Southmead Lane, Westbury-on-Trym, Bristol, BS10 5NB, UK.
Jon OxleyNorth Bristol Hospitals Trust, Department of Histopathology, Southmead Hospital, Southmead Lane, Westbury-on-Trym, BS10 5NB, Bristol, UK.
Neil OakleySheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Department of Urology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Road, S10 2JF, UK.
Susan MorganSheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Department of Histopathology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Road, S10 2JF, UK.
Fawzia TahirSheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Department of Histopathology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Road, S10 2JF, UK.
Imran AhmadGlasgow & Clyde NHS Trust, Department of Urology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, 1345 Govan Road, Glasgow, UK.
Lorenzo DuttoGlasgow & Clyde NHS Trust, Department of Urology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, 1345 Govan Road, Glasgow, UK.
Jonathan M SalmondGlasgow & Clude NHS Trust, Department of Histopathology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, 1345 Govan Road, Glasgow, UK.
Anand KelkarUniversity College Hospital London, Department of Urology, Westmoreland Street Hospital, 6-18 Westmoreland Street, W1G 8PH, London, UK.
John KellyDivision of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Greg ShawDivision of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
University College Hospital at Westmoreland Street · GBUniversity College London · GBSouthmead Hospital · GBQueen Elizabeth Hospital · GBRoyal Hallamshire Hospital · GBUniversity College Hospital · GBBarking, Havering And Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 19661
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRobotic radical prostatectomy (RARP) is a first-line curative treatment option for localized prostate cancer. Postoperative erectile dysfunction and urinary incontinence are common associated adverse side effects that can negatively impact patients' quality of life. Preserving the lateral neurovascular bundles (NS) during RARP improves functional outcomes. However, selecting men for NS may be difficult when there is concern about incurring in positive surgical margin (PSM) which in turn risks adverse oncological outcomes. The NeuroSAFE technique (intra-operative frozen section examination of the neurovascular structure adjacent prostate margin) can provide real-time pathological consult to promote optimal NS whilst avoiding PSM.

methodsNeuroSAFE PROOF is a single-blinded, multi-centre, randomised controlled trial (RCT) in which men are randomly allocated 1:1 to either NeuroSAFE RARP or standard RARP. Men electing for RARP as primary treatment, who are continent and have good baseline erectile function (EF), defined by International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) score > 21, are eligible. NS in the intervention arm is guided by the NeuroSAFE technique. NS in the standard arm is based on standard of care, i.e. a pre-operative image-based planning meeting, patient-specific clinical information, and digital rectal examination. The primary outcome is assessment of EF at 12 months. The primary endpoint is the proportion of men who achieve IIEF-5 score ≥ 21. A sample size of 404 was calculated to give a power of 90% to detect a difference of 14% between groups based on a feasibility study. Oncological outcomes are continuously monitored by an independent Data Monitoring Committee. Key secondary outcomes include urinary continence at 3 months assessed by the international consultation on incontinence questionnaire, rate of biochemical recurrence, EF recovery at 24 months, and difference in quality of life. DISCUSSION: NeuroSAFE PROOF is the first RCT of intra-operative frozen section during radical prostatectomy in the world. It is properly powered to evaluate a difference in the recovery of EF for men undergoing RARP assessed by patient-reported outcome measures. It will provide evidence to guide the use of the NeuroSAFE technique around the world.

trial registrationNCT03317990 (23 October 2017). Regional Ethics Committee; reference 17/LO/1978.

Indexed as

ProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresErectile DysfunctionHumansMaleMargins of ExcisionMulticenter Studies as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeUrinary IncontinenceFrozen sectionNerve sparingNeuroSAFEPotencyProstate cancerProtocolRandomised controlled trialRobotic prostatectomy

Identifiers

PMID35869497
PMCPMC9306247
OpenAlexW4286716996

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.