ReviewFrontiers in urology2026
High-risk biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer: identification and early intervention strategies.
Review in Frontiers in urology, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Biochemical recurrence (BCR) following primary therapy for prostate cancer (PCa) is associated with disease progression; thus, identifying patients at high risk and implementing management strategies remains critical. This expert opinion outlines a set of recommendations for identifying high-risk BCR patients, provides insights into the impact of a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach on disease management, explores associated costs and resource utilization, and examines the role of androgen receptor signaling pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) in optimizing outcomes. Methods: The latest evidence and clinical guidelines on risk stratification, diagnostic tools, and collaborative management strategies were evaluated. Additionally, expert opinions were collected from nine oncology and urology experts, and their insights were integrated to form a comprehensive approach tailored for clinical application. Results: The panelists reached agreement on several proposed questions, including patients' early detection, risk stratification, early management, and the role of ARPIs and androgen deprivation therapies (ADT). The recommendations emphasize the need for standardized identification of high-risk BCR patients, treatment protocols, and early intervention strategies. Additionally, the multidisciplinary approach facilitates personalized treatment planning, leveraging various specialties' expertise, and addresses the complexity of resource utilization and cost management. However, a lack of agreement on other topics was observed, such as optimal timing of intervention and resource allocation strategies. Conclusion: This narrative, evidence-supported expert-opinion review highlights the importance of standardized protocols, multidisciplinary strategies, and the integration of advanced diagnostics and androgen receptor pathway inhibitors to improve patient outcomes. Further research is warranted to refine predictive models, optimize resource allocation, and enhance therapeutic efficacy.
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.