Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42518100›Full record

ReviewCurrent urology reports2026

Surgical Management of PSMA PET-Positive Lymph Nodes in Prostate Cancer.

Andrea Cosenza, Leonardo Quarta, Armando Galdieri, Michele Brancaccio, Angelo Occhi, Maria Elena Porzi, Paolo Zaurito, Alessandro Viti, Alfonso Santangelo, Pietro Scilipoti and 6 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current urology reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

16 authors.

Andrea CosenzaDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Leonardo QuartaDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Armando GaldieriDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Michele BrancaccioDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Angelo OcchiDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Maria Elena PorziDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Paolo ZauritoDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Alessandro VitiDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Alfonso SantangeloDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Pietro ScilipotiDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Simone ScuderiDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy. scuderi.simone@hsr.it.
Francesco BarlettaDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Armando StabileDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Francesco MontorsiDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Alberto BrigantiDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Giorgio GandagliaDivision of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewPSMA PET has reshaped prostate cancer staging by detecting low-volume nodal metastases occult on conventional imaging. This review summarizes current evidence on miN1M0 disease and discusses features that may guide surgical decision-making. RECENT

findingsEvidence remains heterogeneous, and the role of surgery in miN1M0 disease is undefined. Contemporary series suggest that surgery may be feasible within multimodal treatment in selected patients, supporting that miN1M0 disease should not automatically preclude surgery. Surgical candidacy should consider nodal burden and location, local tumor extent, tumor biology, and technical resectability. Low-volume pelvic nodal disease may represent the most plausible surgical scenario, whereas multiple positive nodes, extra-pelvic involvement, locally advanced disease, and adverse biology suggest higher systemic risk. miN1 status should trigger individualized selection rather than surgical exclusion. Prospective studies are needed to clarify which patients may benefit from surgery within multimodal care.

Indexed as

Lymph Node ExcisionLymph NodesPositron-Emission TomographyProstatic NeoplasmsHumansLymphatic MetastasisMaleNeoplasm StagingLymph node metastasesNodal stagingPelvic lymph node dissectionProstate cancerPSMA PETSurgery

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.