Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41726852›Full record

ReviewEuropean urology open science2026

Perineural Invasion in Radical Prostatectomy Specimens and Its Association with Biochemical Recurrence and Survival in Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Jakub Karwacki, Karolina Klasen, Laura Wojdyło, Maciej Kaczorowski, Adam Gurwin, Agnieszka Hałoń, Paweł Rajwa, Fabio Zattoni, Michael Baboudjian, Takafumi Yanagisawa and 4 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European urology open science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Jakub KarwackiDepartment of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
Karolina KlasenDepartment of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
Laura WojdyłoDepartment of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
Maciej KaczorowskiDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Pathology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
Adam GurwinDepartment of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
Agnieszka HałońDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Pathology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
Paweł RajwaDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Fabio ZattoniDepartment of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, Urology Unit, University of Padova, Padua, Italy.
Michael BaboudjianDepartment of Urology, North Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, AP-HM, Marseille, France.
Takafumi YanagisawaDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Patryk PatrzałekDepartment of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
Wojciech KrajewskiDepartment of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
Tomasz SzydełkoUniversity Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
Bartosz MałkiewiczDepartment of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and objective: Perineural invasion (PNI) in prostate cancer (PC) has been linked to adverse oncological outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between PNI identified in radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens and survival outcomes. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in December 2024 using PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection databases. We included studies reporting on PNI in RP specimens and its association with primary endpoints (biochemical recurrence [BCR] or BCR-free survival) and/or secondary endpoints (cancer-specific survival [CSS], overall survival, recurrence-free survival, disease-free survival [DFS], or metastasis-free survival). Key findings and limitations: A total of 58 studies met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of 40 studies (27 030 patients) demonstrated that PNI was associated with BCR (pooled hazard ratio [HR] 1.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-1.52; Conclusions: Our findings indicate that PNI identified in RP specimens is associated with higher risk of BCR, as well as worse CSS, which underscores its relevance as a prognostic factor in PC. Patient summary: We found that detection of cancer cells around nerves, which is called perineural invasion (PNI), in specimens after surgery to remove the prostate, is linked to a higher chance of worse survival outcomes in prostate cancer. Men with PNI were more likely to experience biochemical recurrence and had worse cancer-specific survival. PNI may help in identifying patients at higher risk after surgery who could benefit from closer follow-up or additional treatment. However, more high-quality studies are needed to confirm its role in guiding long-term care.

Indexed as

Biochemical recurrenceHistopathological examinationOncological outcomesPerineural invasionProstate cancerRadical prostatectomy

Identifiers

PMID41726852
PMCPMC12924184

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.