ArticleProstate international2024
Association between pelvic lymph node dissection and survival among patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy.
Article in Prostate international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Lymphatic-Bone Axis in Cancer Metastasis.Cancers · 2026Review
- Practice patterns of Urological Society of Australia and New Zealand urologists regarding pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer surgery.Prostate international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Although the clinical benefits of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) at the time of radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer remain uncertain, major guidelines recommend PLND based on risk profile. Thus, the objective of this study was to examine the association between PLND and survival among patients undergoing RP stratified by Gleason grade group (GG) with the aim of allowing patients and physicians to make more informed care decisions about the potential risks and benefits of PLND. Materials and methods: From the SEER-17 database, we examined overall (OS) and prostate cancer-specific (PCSS) survival of prostate cancer patients who underwent RP from 2010 to 2015 stratified by GG. We applied propensity score matching to balance pre-operative characteristics including race, age, PSA, household income, and housing status (urban/rural) between patients who did and did not undergo PLND for each GG. Statistical analyses included log-rank test and Kaplan-Meier curves. Results: We extracted a matched cohort from 80,287 patients with GG1-5 who underwent RP. The median PSA value was 6.0 ng/mL, and the median age was 62-years-old. 49,453 patients underwent PLND (61.60%), while 30,834 (38.40%) did not. There was no difference in OS and PCSS between patients who received PLND and those who did not for all Gleason GG (OS-GG1: Conclusions: In this observational study, PLND at the time of RP was not associated with improved OS or PCSS among patients with cGS of 3 + 3, 3 + 4, 4 + 3, 4 + 4, 4 + 5, and 5 + 4. These findings suggest that until definitive clinical trials are completed, prostate cancer patients who have elected RP should be appropriately counseled on the potential risks and lack of proven survival benefit of PLND.
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.