Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41833071›Full record

ArticleThe Prostate2026

The Prognostic Significance of Radiographic Progression Without PSA Progression in Patients With Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer Treated With First-Line ARPI Therapy.

Takeshi Tsutsumi, Shogo Yamazaki, Takuya Matsuda, Takuya Tsujino, Taizo Uchimoto, Takafumi Yanagisawa, Keiichiro Mori, Wataru Fukuokaya, Fumihiko Urabe, Masanobu Saruta and 18 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Prostate, 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. Article
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

28 authors.

Takeshi TsutsumiDepartment of Urology, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Takatsuki City, Osaka, Japan.
Shogo YamazakiDepartment of Urology, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Takatsuki City, Osaka, Japan.
Takuya MatsudaDepartment of Urology, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Takatsuki City, Osaka, Japan.
Takuya TsujinoDepartment of Urology, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Takatsuki City, Osaka, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1559-1889
Taizo UchimotoDepartment of Urology, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Takatsuki City, Osaka, Japan.
Takafumi YanagisawaDepartment of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7410-0712
Keiichiro MoriDepartment of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Wataru FukuokayaDepartment of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1044-912X
Fumihiko UrabeDepartment of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2599-8183
Masanobu SarutaDepartment of Urology, Fujita-Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake City, Aichi, Japan.
Atsuhiko YoshizawaDepartment of Urology, Fujita-Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake City, Aichi, Japan.
Shingo ToyodaDepartment of Urology, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Sayama City, Osaka, Japan.
Saizo FujimotoDepartment of Urology, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Sayama City, Osaka, Japan.
Kyosuke NishioDepartment of Urology, Kawasaki Medical School, Okayama, Japan.
Moritoshi SakamotoDepartment of Urology, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Takatsuki City, Osaka, Japan.
Tatsuo FukushimaDepartment of Urology, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Takatsuki City, Osaka, Japan.
Ko NakamuraDepartment of Urology, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Takatsuki City, Osaka, Japan.
Kazuki NishimuraDepartment of Urology, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Takatsuki City, Osaka, Japan.
Keita NakamoriDepartment of Urology, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Takatsuki City, Osaka, Japan.
Tomohisa MatsunagaDepartment of Urology, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Takatsuki City, Osaka, Japan.
Yuki YoshikawaDepartment of Urology, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Takatsuki City, Osaka, Japan.
Ryoichi MaenosonoDepartment of Urology, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Takatsuki City, Osaka, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9045-5484
Kiyoshi TakaharaDepartment of Urology, Fujita-Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake City, Aichi, Japan.
Teruo InamotoDepartment of Urology, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1351-1315
Takahiro KimuraDepartment of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5673-1553
Kazutoshi FujitaDepartment of Urology, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Sayama City, Osaka, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6774-7497
Kazumasa KomuraDepartment of Urology, Kawasaki Medical School, Okayama, Japan.
Haruhito AzumaDepartment of Urology, Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Takatsuki City, Osaka, Japan.

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science: JSPS 25K12625Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRadiographic progression (RP) without prostate-specific antigen (PSA) elevation has emerged as a clinically important pattern in the androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI) era, but its prevalence and prognostic significance in real-world metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) cohorts remain unclear.

objectiveTo assess the prevalence and prognostic implications of RP alone progression in mHSPC patients treated with first-line ARPIs.

methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 518 mHSPC patients treated with abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone, enzalutamide, or apalutamide. PSA progression was defined using PCWG3 criteria. Patients were categorized into PSA progression or RP alone progression groups, and clinical outcomes were compared.

resultsAmong 169 patients who developed castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), 34 (20.1%) experienced RP alone. RP alone patients had significantly worse overall survival compared to those with PSA progression (median 21 vs. 39 months, p = 0.007), despite exhibiting deeper biochemical responses-PSA nadir (0.055 vs. 0.86 ng/mL, p < 0.001) and a higher rate of PSA nadir < 0.2 ng/mL (61.8% vs. 27.4%, p < 0.001). The baseline characteristic differing between groups was CHAARTED volume classification; high volume disease was markedly more common in RP alone patients (94.1% vs. 77.8%). In univariate and multivariate analyses of the overall cohort, CHAARTED high volume disease was identified as an independent risk factor for RP alone (HR 10.3, 95% CI 1.20-89.3; p = 0.034).

conclusionRP alone progression occurred in approximately one-fifth of patients and was associated with significantly poorer survival despite excellent PSA responses, underscoring the limitation of PSA-based monitoring and supporting routine imaging for early detection of PSA-incongruent disease progression in mHSPC.

Indexed as

Androgen Receptor AntagonistsProstate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsProstatic Neoplasms, Castration-ResistantAgedAged, 80 and overDisease ProgressionHumansMaleMiddle AgedNitrilesPrognosisRadiographyRetrospective StudiesAndrogen Receptor AntagonistsNitrilesProstate-Specific AntigenARPIprostate cancerradiographic progression

Identifiers

PMID41833071
PMCPMC13116049

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.