Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38353798›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2024

Prognostication in Lymph Node-Positive Prostate Cancer with No PSA Persistence After Radical Prostatectomy.

Masaki Shiota, Dai Takamatsu, Yoshiyuki Matsui, Akira Yokomizo, Shuichi Morizane, Ryoichi Saito, Makito Miyake, Masakazu Tsutsumi, Yoshiyuki Yamamoto, Kojiro Tashiro and 25 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

35 authors.

Masaki ShiotaDepartment of Urology, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan. shiota.masaki.101@m.kyushu-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3306-4858
Dai TakamatsuDepartment of Urology, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Yoshiyuki MatsuiDepartment of Urology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Akira YokomizoDepartment of Urology, Harasanshin Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan.
Shuichi MorizaneDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan.
Ryoichi SaitoDepartment of Urology and Andrology, Kansai Medical University, Osaka, Japan.
Makito MiyakeDepartment of Urology, Nara Medical University, Kashihara, Japan.
Masakazu TsutsumiDepartment of Urology, Hitachi General Hospital, Hitachi, Japan.
Yoshiyuki YamamotoDepartment of Urology, Osaka International Cancer Institute, Osaka, Japan.
Kojiro TashiroDepartment of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Ryotaro TomidaDepartment of Urology, Shikoku Cancer Center, Matsuyama, Japan.
Shintaro NaritaDepartment of Urology, Akita University, Akita, Japan.
Kohei EdamuraDepartment of Urology, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan.
Takahiro YamaguchiDepartment of Urology, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan.
Kohei HashimotoDepartment of Urology, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Japan.
Masashi KatoDepartment of Urology, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan.
Takashi KasaharaDivision of Urology, Department of Regenerative and Transplant Medicine, Niigata University, Niigata, Japan.
Takayuki YoshinoDepartment of Urology, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan.
Shusuke AkamatsuDepartment of Urology, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Tomoyuki KanekoDepartment of Urology, Teikyo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Akihiro MatsukawaDepartment of Urology, Kashiwa Hospital, The Jikei University, Chiba, Japan.
Ryuji MatsumotoDepartment of Renal and Genitourinary Surgery, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.
Akira JorakuDepartment of Urology, Ibaraki Prefectural Central Hospital, Ibaraki Cancer Center, Kasama, Japan.
Toshihiro SaitoDepartment of Urology, Niigata Cancer Center Hospital, Niigata, Japan.
Takuma KatoDepartment of Urology, Kagawa University, Kagawa, Japan.
Manabu KatoDepartment of Nephro-Urologic Surgery and Andrology, Mie University, Tsu, Japan.
Hideki EnokidaDepartment of Urology, Kagoshima University, Kagoshima, Japan.
Shinichi SakamotoDepartment of Urology, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.
Naoki TeradaDepartment of Urology, Miyazaki University, Miyazaki, Japan.
Hidenori KannoDepartment of Urology, Yamagata University, Yamagata, Japan.
Naotaka NishiyamaDepartment of Urology, University of Toyama, Toyama, Japan.
Takahiro KimuraDepartment of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiroshi KitamuraDepartment of Urology, University of Toyama, Toyama, Japan.
Masatoshi EtoDepartment of Urology, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Japanese Urological Oncology Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to create a prognostic model to predict disease recurrence among patients with lymph node involvement but no prostate-specific antigen (PSA) persistence and to explore its clinical utility.

methodsThe study analyzed patients with lymph node involvement after pelvic lymph node dissection with radical prostatectomy in whom no PSA persistence was observed between 2006 and 2019 at 33 institutions. Prognostic factors for recurrence-free survival (RFS) were analyzed by the Cox proportional hazards model.

resultsAmong 231 patients, 127 experienced disease recurrence. The factors prognostic for RFS were PSA level at diagnosis (≥ 20 vs. < 20 ng/mL: hazard ratio [HR], 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-2.52; P = 0.017), International Society of Urological Pathology grade group at radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen (group ≥ 4 vs. ≤ 3: HR, 1.63; 95% CI 1.12-2.37; P = 0.010), pathologic T-stage (pT3b/4 vs. pT2/3a: HR, 1.70; 95% CI 1.20-2.42; P = 0.0031), and surgical margin status (positive vs. negative: HR, 1.60; 95% CI 1.13-2.28; P = 0.0086). The prognostic model using four parameters were associated with RFS and metastasis-free survival.

conclusionThe prognostic model in combination with postoperative PSA value and number of lymph nodes is clinically useful for discussing treatment choice with patients.

Indexed as

Lymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalProstatectomyProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsAgedFollow-Up StudiesHumansLymph Node ExcisionMaleMargins of ExcisionMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingNeoplasm StagingPrognosisProstate-Specific AntigenBiochemical recurrenceLymph node involvementPredictive factorPSA persistenceRadical prostatectomy

Identifiers

PMID38353798

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.