Enzalutamide in Men With High-Risk Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Rationale and Treatment Considerations From EMBARK.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

1. Stated Preferences for Systemic Treatments for Prostate Cancer: A Targeted Review of the Discrete-Choice Experiment Literature.The patient · 2026
   Pooled it
2. Enzalutamide in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer: key findings from subsequent analyses of EMBARK and their implications in clinical practice.Future oncology (London, England) · 2026
   Article
3. Enzalutamide in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer: key findings from the EMBARK study.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  Editorial Comment.2025

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as