ArticlePloS one2025
Phenotypic stratification predicts the pace, but not the outcome, of continence recovery after radical prostatectomy.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUrinary incontinence (UI) is a common complication following radical prostatectomy (RP), with heterogeneous response to pelvic floor rehabilitation. Identifying patient subgroups with distinct recovery patterns may improve treatment planning.
methodsWe prospectively enrolled 182 men (mean age 66.1 ± 6.5 years) undergoing RP for localized prostate cancer. All participated in a standardized rehabilitation program. K-means clustering was applied to 11 baseline clinical variables, including urinary incontinence severity, pelvic floor function measures, and oncological risk characteristics, to identify distinct patient phenotypes. Continence was defined as pad test result ≤2 g and assessed at three time points. Statistical analyses included non-parametric tests, clustering validation (internal indices, bootstrap, consensus), and multiple testing correction using the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure.
resultsThree phenotypic clusters were identified (Cluster 0: n = 97; Cluster 1: n = 65; Cluster 2: n = 20), differing significantly in oncological severity and UI burden. At the second rehabilitation visit, continence was achieved in 69.2% of Cluster 1 patients, 55.0% in Cluster 0, and 35.0% in Cluster 2 (p = 0.034). By the third rehabilitation assessment (conducted after completing phase III of the rehabilitation program), continence rates increased to 88.4%, 77.5%, and 60.0% across the three clusters. Patients with earlier recovery were more likely to have received preoperative rehabilitation (87% vs. 70%, p = 0.054). Internal validation supported the three-cluster structure, with lower stability for the smallest subgroup. Multiple testing correction confirmed significant differences across clusters and recovery patterns. Predictive models showed low accuracy (AUC < 0.65).
conclusionsPhenotypic clustering revealed clinically distinct subgroups with differing recovery trajectories. This approach may support personalized post-prostatectomy rehabilitation strategies.
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.