Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 402

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Surgical Learning Curve for Prostate Cancer Control After Radical Prostatectomy

Open access
Vickers, A. J., Bianco, F. J., Serio, A. M., Eastham, J. A., Schrag, D., Klein, E. A., Reuther, A. M., Kattan, M. W., Pontes, J. E., Scardino, P. T.·2007·JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The learning curve for surgery--i.e., improvement in surgical outcomes with increasing surgeon experience--remains primarily a theoretical concept; actual curves based on surgical outcome data are rarely presented. We analyzed the surgical learning curve for prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. METHODS: The study cohort included 7765 prostate cancer patients who were treated with radical prostatectomy by one of 72 surgeons at four major US academic medical centers between 1987 and 2003. For each patient, surgeon experience was coded as the total number of radical prostatectomies performed by the surgeon before the patient's operation. Multivariable survival-time regression models were used to evaluate the association between surgeon experience and prostate cancer recurrence, defined as a serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of more than 0.4 ng/mL followed by a subsequent higher PSA level (i.e., biochemical recurrence), with adjustment for established clinical and tumor characteristics. All P values are two-sided. RESULTS: The learning curve for prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy was steep and did not start to plateau until a surgeon had completed approximately 250 prior operations. The predicted probabilities of recurrence at 5 years were 17.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 12.1% to 25.6%) for patients treated by surgeons with 10 prior operations and 10.7% (95% CI = 7.1% to 15.9%) for patients treated by surgeons with 250 prior operations (difference = 7.2%, 95% CI = 4.6% to 10.1%; P<.001). This finding was robust to sensitivity analysis; in particular, the results were unaffected if we restricted the sample to patients treated after 1995, when stage migration related to the advent of PSA screening appeared largely complete. CONCLUSIONS: As a surgeon's experience increases, cancer control after radical prostatectomy improves, presumably because of improved surgical technique. Further research is needed to examine the specific techniques used by experienced surgeons that are associated with improved outcomes.

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 · 10.1093/jnci/djm060

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 402

Metadata

Authors
Vickers, A. J., Bianco, F. J., Serio, A. M., Eastham, J. A., Schrag, D., Klein, E. A., Reuther, A. M., Kattan, M. W., Pontes, J. E., & Scardino, P. T.
Venue
JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Published
2007-07-24
Volume
99
Issue
15
Pages
1171-1177
ISSN
  • 0027-8874 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2105
OpenAlex
W2019425393
Cited by
402
References
0
FWCI
38.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: The Surgical Learning Curve for Prostate Cancer Control After Radical Prostatectomy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jnci/djm060
The paper
Vickers, A. J., Bianco, F. J., Serio, A. M., Eastham, J. A., Schrag, D., Klein, E. A., Reuther, A. M., Kattan, M. W., Pontes, J. E., & Scardino, P. T. (2007). The Surgical Learning Curve for Prostate Cancer Control After Radical Prostatectomy. JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djm060

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.