ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2025
Comparing post-treatment urinary and colorectal procedures in prostate cancer patients using population-based linked data.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2025. 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.
- Post-prostatectomy rehospitalisation rates and risk factors in South Australian men with prostate cancer: evidence from linked data.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Socioeconomic and Geographic Disparities in Anorectal and Urinary Procedures Following Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate urinary and colorectal procedures among men who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT).
methodsWe studied 16,271 (RP = 8516 and EBRT = 7755) South Australian men diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2001 and 2021. Colorectal and urinary procedures were extracted from hospital admission procedure codes and Medical Benefits Schedule item codes. Rates were estimated at 30-days, 90-days, 6-months, 1-year, 2-years and 5-years post-treatment. We estimated the average treatment effect of RP (compared with EBRT) by applying propensity-matched analyses, accounting for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Subgroup analyses were undertaken for different treatment periods (2001-2010 vs. 2011-2021).
resultsAt 1-year post-treatment, the crude rates of colorectal procedures were 43 and 70/1000 person-years among RP and EBRT patients, respectively, while crude rates for urinary procedures were 258 and 74/1000 person-years, respectively. Propensity matched analyses indicated that patients undergoing RP underwent more post-treatment urinary procedures, being 21.2% higher at 6-months and 16.3% higher at 5-years than men who received EBRT. Colorectal procedures were slightly more frequent among RP than EBRT patients during the first 90-days but less frequent from 1-year onwards (5.9% lower at 5-years among RP group). Between 2011 and 2021, there were considerably fewer urinary procedures for men who underwent RP than those treated between 2001 and 2010.
conclusionThere is a statistically significant difference in the frequency of post-treatment procedures between patients who underwent RP and those who had EBRT, which likely indicates a difference in adverse treatment effects. These findings may lead to more informed treatment decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39658770What 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.