Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40646389›Full record

ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2026

Adherence to post-therapeutic multidisciplinary tumor board recommendation and its influence on oncological outcomes in high-risk prostate cancer patients following radical prostatectomy.

Benedikt Hoeh, Jeremy Kwe, Fabian Schreiber, Tobias Hölscher, Katharina Boehm, Martin Baunacke, Roman Herout, Christian Thomas, Angelika Borkowetz

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International urology and nephrology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Benedikt HoehDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany. robertbenedikt.hoeh@ukdd.de.
Jeremy KweDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.
Fabian SchreiberDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.
Tobias HölscherDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, 01307, Dresden, Germany.
Katharina BoehmDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.
Martin BaunackeDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.
Roman HeroutDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.
Christian ThomasDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.
Angelika BorkowetzDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP), multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDT) issue recommendations to undergo adjuvant (aRT) or salvage radiotherapy (sRT). However, reliable data regarding the adherence rate to MDT recommendations and subsequently its impact on oncological outcomes are scarce.

methodsWe retrospectively identified patients treated with RP within a certified prostate cancer center between 2012 and 2016, receiving an MDT recommendation to undergo adjuvant or salvage radiotherapy following RP due to adverse pathological features (non-organ confined disease, positive surgical margin, positive lymph node). Patients with a follow-up < 3 years were excluded. Among patients recommended to undergo aRT, adherence rate was calculated. Patients adherent vs. non-adherent to aRT recommendation were compared regarding biochemical recurrence (BCR), PSA failure following aRT or sRT, and cancer-specific (CSS) and overall survival (OS).

resultsOf 802 patients, 408 (51.5%) were recommended to undergo aRT. Among those, 121 (30%) received aRT, whereas 287 (70%) were non-adherent to aRT-MDT recommendation. In multivariable logistic regression models, age, performance status and presence of adverse pathological features represented statistically significant predictors to undergo aRT. Rates of BCR (40.4 vs. 66.6%) as well as subsequent median time of PSA failure following radiotherapy (83 vs. 42 months) favored patients adherent to aRT recommendations (both p < 0.001). No differences were recorded in CSS and OS analyses regarding adherence to aRT recommendations.

conclusionSolely a fraction of patients followed the recommendation to undergo aRT. Patients adherent to aRT recommendation demonstrated lower rates of subsequent PCa recurrences, albeit not (yet) translating into CSS/OS differences.

Indexed as

Guideline AdherenceProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsAgedHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalProstate-Specific AntigenRadiotherapy, AdjuvantRetrospective StudiesSalvage TherapyTreatment OutcomeProstate-Specific AntigenAdjuvantBiochemical recurrenceMultidisciplinary tumor boardProstate cancerSalvage

Identifiers

PMID40646389
PMCPMC12864311

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.