Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38244095›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2024

Size of lymph-node metastases in prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: implication for imaging and oncologic follow-up of 2705 lymph-node positive patients.

Fabian Falkenbach, Mykyta Kachanov, Sami-Ramzi Leyh-Bannurah, Tobias Maurer, Sophie Knipper, Daniel Köhler, Markus Graefen, Guido Sauter, Lars Budäus

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Head-to-head comparison ofEJNMMI research · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Editorial Comment on "Risk Model for Lymph Node-Positive Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy".International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Size and SUVThe Prostate · 2025
    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

9 authors.

Fabian FalkenbachMartini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1907-3982
Mykyta KachanovInstitute of Human Genetics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Sami-Ramzi Leyh-BannurahProstate Center Northwest, Department of Urology, Pediatric Urology and Uro-Oncology, St. Antonius-Hospital, Gronau, Germany.
Tobias MaurerMartini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Sophie KnipperMartini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Daniel KöhlerDepartment for Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Markus GraefenMartini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Guido SauterDepartment of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Lars BudäusMartini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. budaeus@uke.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite modern imaging modalities, lymph-node staging before radical prostatectomy (RP) remains challenging in patients with prostate cancer (PCa). The visibility of lymph-node metastases (LNMs) is critically influenced by their size.

objectiveThis study aims to describe the distribution of maximal tumor diameters (i.e., size) in LNMs of pN1-PCa at RP and its consequences on visibility in preoperative imaging and oncological outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsA total of 2705 consecutive patients with pN1-PCa at RP, harboring a cumulative 7510 LNMs, were analyzed. Descriptive and multivariable analyses addressed the risk of micrometastases (MM)-only disease and the visibility of LNMs. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox analyses were used for biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS) stratified for MM-only disease.

resultsThe median LNM size was 4.5mm (interquartile range (IQR): 2.0-9.0 mm). Of 7510 LNMs, 1966 (26%) were MM (≤ 2mm). On preoperative imaging, 526 patients (19%) showed suspicious findings (PSMA-PET/CT: 169/344, 49%). In multivariable analysis, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (OR 0.98), age (OR 1.01), a Gleason score greater than 7 at biopsy (OR 0.73), percentage of positive cores at biopsy (OR 0.36), and neoadjuvant treatment (OR 0.51) emerged as independent predictors for less MM-only disease (p < 0.05). Patients with MM-only disease compared to those harboring larger LNMs had a longer BCRFS (median 60 versus 29 months, p < 0.0001).

conclusionOverall, 26% of LNMs were MM (≤ 2mm). Adverse clinical parameters were inversely associated with MM at RP. Consequently, PSMA-PET/CT did not detect a substantial proportion of LNMs. LNM size and count are relevant for prognosis.

Indexed as

Positron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyProstatic NeoplasmsFollow-Up StudiesHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph Node ExcisionLymph NodesMaleProstatectomyRetrospective StudiesMicrometastasesPelvic lymph node dissectionProstate cancerPSMARadical prostatectomy

Identifiers

PMID38244095
PMCPMC10799788

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.