ArticleWorld journal of urology2026
Cancer-specific mortality differences between radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy after biochemical recurrence: analysis of a health system-wide cohort.
Article in World journal of 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBiochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer (PC) is associated with substantially different cancer-specific mortality (CSM) outcomes, commonly attributed to patient selection bias. We compared CSM after BCR in RP vs. RT patients while accounting for baseline other-cause mortality (OCM) disparities.
methodsWe identified patients with BCR after initial RP or RT for PC at a single US health system between 1995 and 2023. We compared CSM using Fine-Gray competing risk regression adjusting for patient and disease characteristics. As a sensitivity analysis, we performed 1:1 OCM risk matching using predicted 5-year OCM to create cohorts with comparable baseline health status, then evaluated CSM differences adjusting for European Association of Urology (EAU) BCR risk classification.
resultsWe identified 1,047 men with BCR (717 RP, 330 RT). Median follow-up from BCR was 5.5 (2.7–10.5) years. Cumulative incidence of OCM (10-year: 43.5% vs. 13.3%) and CSM (10-year: 28.9% vs. 6.8%) was significantly higher in RT patients compared to RP (Gray’s test p < 0.001 for both). After multivariable adjustment, RT was associated with substantially increased CSM relative hazard (HR 4.95, 95% CI 3.10–7.89, p < 0.001). OCM-matching created a smaller cohort of 248 patients (124 per group) with comparable 5-year OCM (10.8% vs. 12.0%, p = 0.2). In this cohort, RT patients had a 2.18-fold increased CSM relative hazard compared to RP patients (95% CI 1.20–3.96, p = 0.01) even after adjustment for EAU BCR risk.
conclusionsA non-negligible portion of CSM after BCR disparities between RT and RP seems to be related to OCM differences. However, substantial CSM differences persist even after OCM matching, suggesting that BCR definitions after RP and RT are not clinically equivalent for prognostic assessment or therapeutic decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41984246What 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.