ArticleBMC cancer2024
Efficacy of brachytherapy versus radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer-propensity score-matched comparison.
Article in BMC cancer, 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.
- Long-Term Outcomes of Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy in Localized Prostate Cancer: A 17-Year Retrospective Analysis of a Single-Center Portuguese Cohort.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe brachytherapy (BT) and radical prostatectomy (RP) are two methods recommended in current guidelines for the treatment of localized prostate cancer (PCa). It is difficult to compare the oncological results of these two treatments because of differences in baseline characteristics and treatment selection.we sought to compare the efficacy of BT and RP after propensity score matching(PSM)analysis.
methodsBetween January 2009 and December 2021, our institution treated 657 patients with localized PCa (BT: n = 198; RP: n = 459)and followed up for > 2 years. Biochemical recurrence was defined as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels of nadir plus 2 ng/ml or higher (Phoenix definition) for BT, and as PSA0.2 ng/ml or greater for RP. PSM was applied based on the age, body mass index, PSA, prostate volume, clinical T-stage, Gleason grade, percentage of positive puncture needles ≥ 1/2, maximum tumor diameter ≥ 5 mm, and follow-up period.
resultsMedian follow-up was 63 months for BT and 52 months for RP. After propensity score adjustment, a total of 294 (147 each) patients remained for further analysis.Kaplan-Meier curves showed no statistically significant difference in clinical relapse-free survivals (cRFS) (p = 0.637),overall survival (OS) (p = 0.726),and cancer-specific survival (CSS) (p = 0.505).BT was associated with improved biochemical relapse-free survivals (bRFS) compared to RP (p = 0.022), Logistic multivariate analysis based on the whole cohort revealed that clinical T stage ≥ T
conclusionThe BT and RP group patients exhibited similar cRFS, OS, and CSS. However, patients in the BT groups exhibited better bRFS than those in the RP group.Clinical T stage ≥ T
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.