Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36434164›Full record

ArticleProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2024

Immediate radiotherapy versus observation in patients with node-positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy.

Christian Schaufler, Sumedh Kaul, Aaron Fleishman, Ruslan Korets, Peter Chang, Andrew Wagner, Simon Kim, Joaquim Bellmunt, Irving Kaplan, Aria F Olumi and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2024. 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
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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.

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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. CUA-AUA Residents and Fellows Program: New Orleans 2022.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2022
    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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Christian SchauflerDivision of Urologic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Sumedh KaulDepartment of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Aaron FleishmanDepartment of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7338-8235
Ruslan KoretsDivision of Urologic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Peter ChangDivision of Urologic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Andrew WagnerDivision of Urologic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Simon KimDivision of Urology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center, Aurora, CO, USA.
Joaquim BellmuntDepartment of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Irving KaplanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Aria F OlumiDivision of Urologic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5356-2558
Boris GershmanDivision of Urologic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA. bgershma@bidmc.harvard.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-5191-7255
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USDana-Farber Cancer Institute · USUniversity of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe optimal management of node-positive (pN1) prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy (RP) remains uncertain. Despite randomized evidence, utilization of immediate, life-long androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) remains poor, and recent trials of early salvage radiotherapy included only a minority of pN1 patients. We therefore emulated a hypothetical pragmatic trial of adjuvant radiotherapy versus observation in men with pN1 prostate cancer.

methodsUsing the RADICALS-RT trial to inform the design of a hypothetical trial, we identified men aged 50-69 years with pT2-3 Rany pN1 M0, pre-treatment PSA < 50 ng/mL prostate cancer in the NCDB from 2006 to 2015 treated with 60-72 Gy of adjuvant RT (aRT) ± ADT within 26 weeks of RP or observation. After estimating a propensity score for receipt of aRT, we estimated absolute and relative treatment effects using stabilized inverse probability of treatment (sIPW) re-weighting.

resultsIn total, 3510 patients were included in the study, of whom 587 (17%) received aRT (73% with concurrent ADT). Median follow-up was 40.0 -months, during which 333 deaths occurred. After sIPW re-weighting, baseline characteristics were well-balanced. Adjusted overall survival (OS) was 93% versus 89% at 5-years and 82% versus 79% at 7-years for aRT versus observation (p = 0.11). In IPW-reweighted Cox regression, aRT was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (ACM) than observation, but this did not reach statistical significance (HR 0.70 p = 0.06). In analyses examining heterogeneity of treatment effects, aRT was associated with improved ACM only for men with Gleason 8-10 disease (HR 0.59, p = 0.01), ≥2 positive LNs (HR 0.49, p = 0.04 for 2 positive LNs; HR 0.42, p = 0.01 for ≥3 positive LNs), or negative surgical margins (HR 0.50, p = 0.02).

conclusionsIn observational analyses designed to emulate a hypothetical target trial of aRT versus observation in pN1 prostate cancer, aRT was associated with improved OS only for men with Gleason 8-10 disease, ≥2 positive LNs, or negative surgical margins.

Indexed as

Prostatic NeoplasmsAndrogen AntagonistsHumansMaleMargins of ExcisionNeoplasm StagingProstatectomyProstate-Specific AntigenRadiotherapy, AdjuvantSalvage TherapyAndrogen AntagonistsProstate-Specific Antigen

Identifiers

PMID36434164
OpenAlexW4310058951

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.