ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2024
Comparative effectiveness of new treatment modalities for localized prostate cancer through patient-reported outcome measures.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05523856 (Comparative Effectiveness of New Treatment Modalities for Localized Prostate Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Comparative Effectiveness of New Treatment Modalities for Localized Prostate Cancer
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Postoperative functional complications and quality of life following robot-assisted prostatectomy and radiotherapy in localized prostate cancer: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Patient-reported outcomes: active surveillance vs radical therapies in low-risk prostate cancer.BJU international · 2026Article
- Quality of life in low-risk prostate cancer under active surveillance or following radical treatments: the START cohort study.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2026Article
- Prospective trial on focal treatment with hemigland brachytherapy in low-risk prostate cancer: A negative study.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2025Article
- [Prostate cancer screening? Only evidence-based, risk-adjusted, and organized!]Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: There is scarce comparative effectiveness research on the new treatment modalities for localized prostate cancer. We aim to compare through Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) the impact of active surveillance, robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), and real-time brachytherapy, considering side effects (incontinence, irritative/obstructive urinary symptoms, sexual dysfunction and bowel symptoms) and physical and mental health. Materials and Methods: Prospective cohort of men diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer (age 50-75y, T1-T2, and low risk including Gleason 3 + 4 in T1c) from 18 Spanish hospitals, followed up to 24 months. Treatment decisions were jointly made by patients and physicians (n = 572). The Expanded Prostate cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) and Short-Form 36 (SF-36v2) were administered through telephone interviews before and three, six, 12, and 24 months after treatment. To account for correlation among repeated measures, generalized estimating equation models were constructed. All analyses were performed with propensity score weights to solve treatment selection bias. Results: The PROMs completion rate at 24 months was 95.0 %. Active surveillance entails the fewest side effects, but with significant sexual (0.4 standard deviations [SD], p < 0.001) and physical health deterioration (0.5 SD, p < 0.001); and moderate mental health improvement (0.4 SD, p = 0.001) at 24 months. Compared with active surveillance, RARP presented greater urinary incontinence (p = 0.030), and IMRT and real-time brachytherapy worse bowel symptoms (p = 0.027 and p = 0.007) at 24 months. Conclusions: Most side effects of the new treatment modalities seem to be limited to short-term deteriorations, except for moderate-large urinary incontinence in patients who had undergone RARP and moderate bowel deterioration in patients treated with IMRT or with real-time brachytherapy. Furthermore, patients under active surveillance, IMRT, and real-time brachytherapy showed a moderate improvement in mental health.
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.