Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 272

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Long‐term survival after radical prostatectomy versus external‐beam radiotherapy for patients with high‐risk prostate cancer

Open access
Boorjian, Stephen A., Karnes, R. Jeffrey, Viterbo, Rosalia, Rangel, Laureano J., Bergstralh, Eric J., Horwitz, Eric M., Blute, Michael L., Buyyounouski, Mark K.·2011·Cancer

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The long‐term survival of patients with high‐risk prostate cancer was compared after radical prostatectomy (RRP) and after external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with or without adjuvant androgen‐deprivation therapy (ADT). METHODS: In total, 1238 patients underwent RRP, and 609 patients received with EBRT (344 received EBRT plus ADT, and 265 received EBRT alone) between 1988 and 2004 who had a pretreatment prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) level ≥ 20 ng/mL, a biopsy Gleason score between 8 and 10, or clinical tumor classification ≥ T3. The median follow‐up was 10.2 years, 6.0 years, and 7.2 years after RRP, EBRT plus ADT, and EBRT alone, respectively. The impact of treatment modality on systemic progression, cancer‐specific survival, and overall survival was evaluated using multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression analysis and a competing risk‐regression model. RESULTS: The 10‐year cancer‐specific survival rate was 92%, 92%, and 88% after RRP, EBRT plus ADT, and EBRT alone, respectively (P = .06). After adjustment for case mix, no significant differences in the risks of systemic progression (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51‐1.18; P = .23) or prostate cancer death (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.68‐1.91; P = .61) were observed between patients who received EBRT plus ADT and patients who underwent RRP. The risk of all‐cause mortality, however, was greater after EBRT plus ADT than after RRP (HR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.25‐2.05; P = .0002). CONCLUSIONS: RRP alone and EBRT plus ADT provided similar long‐term cancer control for patients with high‐risk prostate cancer. The authors concluded that continued investigation into the differing impact of treatments on quality‐of‐life and noncancer mortality will be necessary to determine the optimal management approach for these patients. Cancer 2011. © 2011 American Cancer Society.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cncr.25900

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 34 references

Cited by

See all 272

Metadata

Authors
Boorjian, S. A., Karnes, R. J., Viterbo, R., Rangel, L. J., Bergstralh, E. J., Horwitz, E. M., Blute, M. L., & Buyyounouski, M. K.
Venue
Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-01-10
Volume
117
Issue
13
Pages
2883-2891
ISSN
  • 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0142
OpenAlex
W1973836296
Cited by
272
References
34
FWCI
22.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Long‐term survival after radical prostatectomy versus external‐beam radiotherapy for patients with high‐risk prostate cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cncr.25900
The paper
Boorjian, S. A., Karnes, R. J., Viterbo, R., Rangel, L. J., Bergstralh, E. J., Horwitz, E. M., Blute, M. L., & Buyyounouski, M. K. (2011). Long‐term survival after radical prostatectomy versus external‐beam radiotherapy for patients with high‐risk prostate cancer. Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.25900

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.