SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2026
Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant therapies for high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer in older adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Brief overview of high-risk/locally advanced prostate cancer in older adults, current neoadjuvant therapies (NHT, NNHT, NCHT), and the uncertainty regarding their comparative efficacy on pathological outcomes. Objectives: This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety profiles of various neoadjuvant treatments in improving pathological outcomes-including positive surgical margin (PSM) rates, minimal residual disease (MRD), clinical downstaging, and post-treatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) reduction-in older adults with high-risk or locally advanced prostate cancer. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for relevant randomized controlled trials and prospective comparative studies published from January 2010 to April 20, 2025. The primary pathological outcomes were positive surgical margin (PSM) rate and minimal residual disease (MRD). Secondary outcomes included clinical downstaging and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response. All network meta-analyses were performed using Bayesian frameworks, with treatment ranking evaluated via the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Results: The network meta-analysis of 15 studies revealed that, according to surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values, novel neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (NNHT) ranked highest for improving key pathological outcomes-notably surgical margin status and post-treatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response. While NNHT achieved the highest pathological response rates, it was associated with the most frequent and severe adverse events, highlighting a critical efficacy-toxicity trade-off in clinical decision-making. Conclusions: Our analysis identifies NNHT as the most effective neoadjuvant approach for optimizing pathological endpoints, despite its association with the highest toxicity burden. This efficacy-safety profile supports its prioritization in subsequent trials designed to evaluate long-term survival and comprehensively assess safety outcomes in this population. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD420251233339.
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.