ArticleBJUI compass2025
A population-based analyses of the evolving management of cN1M0 prostate cancer in the PSMA-PET era.
Article in BJUI compass, 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.
- Management of De Novo miN1 Prostate Cancer in the PSMA-PET Era.The Prostate · 2026Review
- A population-based analyses of the evolving management of cN1M0 prostate cancer in the PSMA-PET era.BJUI compass · 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the patterns of management of clinical node-positive non-metastatic prostate cancer (cN1M0PC) at a population-based level over time, and to identify factors associated with the different management approaches. Patients and methods: The study included men diagnosed with cN1M0PC in Prostate Cancer Outcome Registry Victoria (PCOR-Vic) in Australia between 2008 and 2022. The primary outcome was the use of local therapy (radical prostatectomy or prostate+/- pelvic radiation therapy) within the first 12 months of diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to evaluate factors associated with local therapy use among all men and the likelihood of having a radical prostatectomy among men who had local therapy. Results: Of the 819 men included in this study, 52% had PSMA-PET staging, and this increased over time to 74% in 2018-2022. There were 530 (65%) who had local therapy (169 radical prostatectomy, and 361 radiation therapy), 259 (32%) had systemic therapy alone, and 30 (4%) did not have any treatment. There was an increase in the proportion of men who had local therapy over time, from 52% in 2008-2012 to 72% in 2018-2022. In multivariable analyses, increased age, higher PSA and residency in regional/remote areas were independently associated with lower likelihood of local therapy use, while PSMA-PET staging and more recent year of diagnosis were associated with higher likelihood of local therapy use. Of the 530 men who had local therapy, increased age, higher PSA, higher ISUP grade group and higher clinical T categories were associated with a lower likelihood of having radical prostatectomy while men diagnosed in private institutions and from higher socioeconomic quintiles were more likely to have radical prostatectomy. Conclusion: This is the largest contemporaneous population-based study on the management of cN1M0PC in the PSMA-PET era. There is an increasing use of local therapy for cN1M0PC over time, with large variations in practice.
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.