Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38154806›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association2024

Validation of schedules for optimal prostate-specific antigen monitoring after radical prostatectomy.

Leandro Blas, Masaki Shiota, Tokiyoshi Tanegashima, Shigehiro Tsukahara, Shohei Ueda, Jun Mutaguchi, Shunsuke Goto, Satoshi Kobayashi, Takashi Matsumoto, Junichi Inokuchi and 1 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Editorial Comment to Validation of schedules for optimal PSA monitoring after radical prostatectomy.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Leandro BlasDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Masaki ShiotaDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-3306-4858
Tokiyoshi TanegashimaDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Shigehiro TsukaharaDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Shohei UedaDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Jun MutaguchiDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-8798-2681
Shunsuke GotoDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Satoshi KobayashiDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Takashi MatsumotoDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Junichi InokuchiDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-6791-905X
Masatoshi EtoDepartment of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Kyushu University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly detection of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) is crucial for early treatment and improving survival outcomes. The optimal prostate-specific antigen (PSA) monitoring remains unclear, and several models have been proposed. We aimed to externally validate four models for optimal PSA monitoring after RP and propose modifications to improve them.

methodsWe reviewed the clinicopathological data of 896 patients who underwent robot-assisted RP between 2009 and 2022. We examined all PSA values and estimated the PSA value for four monitoring schedules at each time point in the virtual follow-up. We defined the ideal PSA for BCR detection between 0.2 and 0.4 ng/mL.

resultsDuring the median follow-up of 21.4 months, 128 (14.3%) patients presented BCR. The original and modified Keio models, National Cancer Center Hospital model, and American Urological Association/American Society for Radiation Oncology model detected BCR in 14 (10.9%), three (2.3%), 12 (9.4%), and 11 (8.6%) patients with PSA >0.4 ng/mL. Most patients experienced BCR detected with PSA >0.4 ng/mL during the first year postoperative. The modification of interval within 6 months postoperative avoided BCR detection with PSA >0.4 ng/mL within the first year postoperative in 8/9 (88.9%), 1/2 (50.0%), 5/6 (83.3%), and 4/4 (100%) for the original and modified Keio models, National Cancer Center Hospital model, and American Urological Association/American Society for Radiation Oncology model, respectively.

conclusionWe validated four models for PSA monitoring after RP to detect BCR and suggested modifications to avoid detections out of the desired range of PSA. These modifications could help to establish an optimal PSA monitoring schedule after RP.

Indexed as

Prostate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsHumansMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalProstatectomyRetrospective StudiesProstate-Specific Antigenbiochemical recurrencemonitoringprostate cancerprostatic‐specific antigenradical prostatectomy

Identifiers

PMID38154806
OpenAlexW4390369808

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.