Observational studyFuture oncology (London, England)2026
Real-world treatment patterns in patients with biochemical recurrence after local prostate cancer therapy.
Observational study in Future oncology (London, England), 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimDescribe real-world anticancer treatment patterns in the USA among patients with prostate cancer (PC) who experience biochemical recurrence (BCR) following radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiation therapy (RT), stratified by prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSA-DT).
methodsRetrospective, observational cohort study using the Optum® PC electronic medical record database (2012-2023). Patients with BCR were stratified into high-/low-risk groups based on PSA-DT of <12/≥12 months. A sensitivity analysis defined risk status using a ≤9-/>9-month cutoff.
resultsThe study included 2,981 patients with BCR in the RP cohort and 697 in the RT cohort. Median follow-up was 30.8 months (Q1-Q3: 18.1-50.8). Any treatment use was higher among high-risk BCR patients (RP: 67.1% vs 54.9%; RT: 52.8% vs 28.7%). After RP, most patients received salvage RT (high-risk: 41.3%; low-risk: 40.7%), followed by androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) monotherapy (high-risk: 30.2%; low-risk: 22.8%) and ADT plus androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) (high-risk: 11.9%; low-risk: 3.7%). After RT, ADT monotherapy (high-risk: 22.9%; low-risk: 12.3%) and ADT plus ARPI (high-risk: 16.5%; low-risk 4.9%) were most common. Sensitivity analyses showed similar results.
conclusionsThese findings demonstrate that ADT remains the predominant standard of care, whereas ADT plus ARPI is infrequently used, even among high-risk BCR patients.
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.