Cited by 68Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchBreast Cancer Treatment Studies

Neoadjuvant hormonal ablative therapy before radical prostatectomy: a review. Is it indicated?

SCOLIERI, MICHAEL J., ALTMAN, ANDREW, RESNICK, MARTIN I.·2000·Journal of Urology

Abstract

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant hormonal ablation therapy has been used to decrease the rate of positive surgical margins in patients treated with radical prostatectomy. We reviewed the available literature to determine whether this therapy is indicated and beneficial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a MEDLINE key word search and assessed randomized prospective articles. Data were analyzed for the rate of positive surgical margins, seminal vesicle invasion and lymph node metastasis as well as surgical characteristics, including operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, rate of complications and difficulty of surgical dissection. In addition, these data were evaluated for prostate specific antigen-free survival. RESULTS: Neoadjuvant hormonal therapy decreased the rate of positive margins in 6 of the 7 randomized prospective studies. In none of 4 randomized prospective series was there an improved rate of seminal vesicle invasion with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy. Of 4 studies 3 showed no improvement in the rate of lymph node metastasis after neoadjuvant hormonal therapy compared with that in controls. Similarly there was no improvement in prostate specific antigen-free survival and no significant difference in operative time, operative blood loss, transfusion or hospital stay in patients treated with neoadjuvant hormonal therapy and controls. In addition, in 2 of 3 studies there was no difference in the complication rate. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of the available literature revealed no significant improvement in outcome to support the routine administration of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy before prostatectomy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0022-5347(05)67008-5

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 55 · Cited by 68

Authors
SCOLIERI, M. J., ALTMAN, A., & RESNICK, M. I.
Affiliations
Case Western Reserve University (US)
Venue
Journal of Urology
Published
2000-11
Volume
164
Issue
5
Pages
1465-1472
ISSN
  • 0022-5347 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-3792
OpenAlex
W2004824277
Cited by
68
References
55
Citations by year
2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 3
FWCI
5.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Urology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Prostate Cancer Treatment and Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
Keywords
neoadjuvant endocrine therapy, androgen deprivation therapy, radical prostatectomy, prostate cancer, positive surgical margins, seminal vesicle invasion, lymph node metastasis, surgical complications, operative time
MeSH terms
Androgen Antagonists, Costs and Cost Analysis, Humans, Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone, Lymphatic Metastasis, Male, Preoperative Care, Prostatectomy, Prostatic Neoplasms, Seminal Vesicles, Treatment Outcome, Chemotherapy, Adjuvant, Prostate-Specific Antigen, Disease-Free Survival, Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal

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