ArticleCancers2024
Impact of Cryopreserved Placental Allografts on Biochemical Recurrence in Prostate Cancer.
Article in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Human birth tissue products for pathological pain: mechanisms, evidence, and translational outlook.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Review
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
backgroundHuman placental allografts are widely used to promote wound healing. Placental (or amniotic membrane/umbilical cord) allografts are placed along the neurovascular bundles during radical prostatectomy to improve continence and erectile function recovery. It is unknown whether placental allografts impact biochemical recurrence (BCR).
methodsThis was a single-surgeon retrospective study of 566 robotic radical prostatectomies performed from April 2015 to March 2021. The patients were divided into three groups: the negative control, Brand A, and Brand B. Brand A and Brand B were both cryopreserved amniotic membrane (CAM) allografts. A total of 324 cases were included for BCR Kaplan-Meier and risk-adjusted multivariate analyses (362 for continence analysis). In vitro analyses were performed to determine the effect of CAM allografts on prostate cancer (PCa) cell line growth.
resultsFor propensity score-matched analysis (adjusting for pre-operative PSA, tumor stage, Gleason Grade, and margin status), (1) the allograft groups did not show differences in time to BCR vs. the negative control group (
conclusionscryopreserved AM allografts (combined or individual brands) did not show a significant effect on BCR but improved continence recovery for PCa patients.
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.