ArticleProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2026
Evaluation of clinical risk stratification to determine benefit from long-term versus short-term androgen deprivation in high-risk localized prostate cancer.
Article in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2026. 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.
- Personalized intensification of treatment for hormone-sensitive prostate cancer.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatients treated with RT and long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ltADT) for high-risk localized prostate cancer (HRLPC) with 1 high-risk factor (any of Gleason ≥8, PSA > 20 ng/mL, ≥cT3; "high-risk") have better outcomes than those with 2-3 factors and/or cN1 disease ("very high risk"). We evaluated whether this risk stratification could determine benefit from ltADT versus short-term (stADT).
methodsThe Intermediate Clinical Endpoints in Cancer of the Prostate (ICECaP) repository of randomized trials was queried to identify eligible patients and trials. The key outcomes of interest were metastasis-free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), time to metastasis (TTM) and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). Stratified Cox and Gray's regression were used to obtain the overall treatment effect for outcomes and risk groups, and the Wald interaction test to estimate whether treatment benefit differed by risk group or trial. Heterogeneity of studies was assessed by Cochran's Q and I
results2780 patients from 3 trials were included. Patients with very-high risk disease had greater benefit with ltADT compared to high-risk disease (MFS HR 0.77 [0.68-0.88] vs. 0.89 [0.76-1.03]; TTM 0.61 [0.51-0.74] vs. 0.77 [0.59-0.99]; PCSM 0.71 [0.56-0.90] vs. 0.82 [0.59-1.14]; OS 0.87 [0.76-1.00] vs. 0.93 [0.79-1.08]), but there was no statistically significant difference in treatment effect by risk group (p-interaction >0.1). Heterogeneity for treatment effect across trials was low in the very high-risk group and moderate in the high-risk group.
conclusionsClinical risk stratification merits further evaluation in clinical trials to identify which patients with HRLPC may benefit from ltADT versus stADT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39779964What 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.