-
European Radiology Nov 2022To systematically assess the early detection rate of biochemical prostate cancer recurrence using choline, fluciclovine, and PSMA. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To systematically assess the early detection rate of biochemical prostate cancer recurrence using choline, fluciclovine, and PSMA.
METHODS
Under the guidance of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis Diagnostic Test Accuracy guidelines, literature that assessed the detection rates (DRs) of choline, fluciclovine, and PSMA in prostate cancer biochemical recurrence was searched in PubMed and EMBASE databases for our systematic review from 2012 to July 15, 2021. In addition, the PSA-stratified performance of detection positivity was obtained to assess the DRs for various methods, including fluciclovine, PSMA, or choline PET/CT, with respect to biochemical recurrence based on different PSA levels.
RESULTS
In total, 64 studies involving 11,173 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of the studies, 12, 7, and 48 focused on choline, fluciclovine, and PSMA, respectively. The pooled DRs were 24%, 37%, and 44%, respectively, for a PSA level less than 0.5 ng/mL (p < 0.001); 36%, 44%, and 60% for a PSA level of 0.5-0.99 ng/mL (p < 0.001); and 50%, 61%, and 80% for a PSA level of 1.0-1.99 ng/mL (p < 0.001). The DR with F-labeled PSMA was higher than that with Ga-labeled PSMA, and the DR was 58%, 72%, and 88% for PSA levels < 0.5 ng/mL, 0.5-0.9 ng/mL, and 1.0-1.99 ng/mL, respectively.
CONCLUSION
The DRs of PSMA-radiotracers were greater than those of choline-radiotracers and fluciclovine-radiotracers at the patient level. F-labeled PSMA achieved a higher DR than Ga-labeled PSMA.
KEY POINTS
• The DRs of PSMA-radiotracers were greater than those of choline-radiotracers and fluciclovine-radiotracers at the patient level. • F-labeled PSMA achieved a higher DR than Ga-labeled PSMA.
Topics: Male; Humans; Gallium Radioisotopes; Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography; Prostate-Specific Antigen; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Prostatic Neoplasms; Choline
PubMed: 35486169
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-022-08802-7 -
Urologia Internationalis 2017The role of radical prostatectomy (RP) is still controversial for locally advanced prostate cancer (PC). Radiotherapy (RT) and hormonal therapy (HT) are usually used as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The role of radical prostatectomy (RP) is still controversial for locally advanced prostate cancer (PC). Radiotherapy (RT) and hormonal therapy (HT) are usually used as a primary treatment.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic online search was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement. Eligible publications reporting the overall survival (OS) and/or disease-specific survival (DSS) were included. A total of 14 studies, including 17,869 patients, were considered for analysis. The impact of therapeutic modalities on survival was assessed, with a risk of bias assessment according to the Newcastle Ottawa Scale.
RESULTS
For RP, RT, and HT, the mean 10-year OS was 70.7% (95% CI 61.3-80.2), 65.8% (95% CI 48.1-83.3), and 22.6% (95% CI 4.9-40.3; p = 0.001), respectively. The corresponding 10-year DSS was 84.1% (95% CI 75.1-93.2), 89.4% (95% CI 70.1-108.6), and 50.4% (95% CI 31.2-69.6; p = 0.0127), respectively. Among all treatment combinations, RP displayed significant improvement in OS when included in the treatment (Z = 4.01; p < 0.001). Adjuvant RT significantly improved DSS (Z = 2.7; p = 0.007). Combination of RT and HT favored better OS in comparison to monotherapy with RT or HT (Z = 3.61; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
Improved outcomes in advanced PC were detected for RP plus adjuvant RT vs. RP alone and RT plus adjuvant HT vs. RT alone with comparable survival results between both regimens. RP with adjuvant RT may present the modality of choice when HT is contraindicated.
Topics: Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Chi-Square Distribution; Disease-Free Survival; Humans; Male; Odds Ratio; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Neoplasms; Radiotherapy, Adjuvant; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28675891
DOI: 10.1159/000478789 -
Chinese Medical Journal Apr 2024Lymph node staging of prostate cancer (PCa) is important for planning and monitoring of treatment. 18 F-prostate specific membrane antigen positron emission... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
18 F-prostate specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computerized tomography for lymph node staging in medium/high risk prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Lymph node staging of prostate cancer (PCa) is important for planning and monitoring of treatment. 18 F-prostate specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computerized tomography ( 18 F-PSMA PET/CT) has several advantages over 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT, but its diagnostic value requires further investigation. This meta-analysis focused on establishing the diagnostic utility of 18 F-PSMA PET/CT for lymph node staging in medium/high-risk PCa.
METHODS
We searched the EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane library, and Web of Science databases from inception to October 1, 2022. Prostate cancer, 18 F, lymph node, PSMA, and PET/CT were used as search terms and the language was limited to English. We additionally performed a manual search using the reference lists of key articles. Patients and study characteristics were extracted and the QUADAS-2 tool was employed to evaluate the quality of included studies. Sensitivity, specificity, the positive and negative likelihood ratio (PLR and NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), area under the curve (AUC), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to evaluate the diagnostic value of 18 F-PSMA PET/CT. Stata 17 software was employed for calculation and statistical analyses.
RESULTS
A total of eight diagnostic tests including 734 individual samples and 6346 lymph nodes were included in this meta-analysis. At the patient level, the results of each consolidated summary were as follows: sensitivity of 0.57 (95% CI 0.39-0.73), specificity of 0.95 (95% CI 0.92-0.97), PLR of 11.2 (95% CI 6.6-19.0), NLR of 0.46 (95% CI 0.31-0.68), DOR of 25 (95% CI 11-54), and AUC of 0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.96). At the lesion level, the results of each consolidated summary were as follows: sensitivity of 0.40 (95% CI 0.21-0.62), specificity of 0.99 (95% CI 0.95-1.00), PLR of 40.0 (95% CI 9.1-176.3), NLR of 0.61 (95% CI 0.42-0.87), DOR of 66 (95% CI 14-311), and AUC of 0.86 (95% CI 0.83-0.89).
CONCLUSIONS
18 F-PSMA PET/CT showed moderate sensitivity but high specificity in lymph node staging of medium/high-risk PCa. The diagnostic efficacy was almost equivalent to that reported for 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT.
REGISTRATION
International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), No. CRD42023391101.
Topics: Humans; Male; Prostatic Neoplasms; Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography; Lymph Nodes; Neoplasm Staging; Lymphatic Metastasis; Glutamate Carboxypeptidase II
PubMed: 37690993
DOI: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000002850 -
Scientific Reports Jan 2015Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common non-dermatologic cancer in the western countries in western countries. High-risk PCa accounts for 15% of the diagnosed cases. In... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common non-dermatologic cancer in the western countries in western countries. High-risk PCa accounts for 15% of the diagnosed cases. In this study, we compare the long-term survival outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP), radiation therapy (RT), brachytherapy (BT), androgen- deprivation therapy (ADT), and watchful waiting (WW) in high-risk prostate cancer (PCa). Overall, RP/(RT plus ADT) gave the best survival outcome in patients with high-risk PCa, whereas ADT/WW had the worst outcome. The overall priority for treatment strategy could be ranked as follows: RP/(RT plus ADT), RT, and ADT/WW. RP had significant better overall survival (OS) than RT or BT, and RP had significant lower cancer-specific mortality (CSM) than RT (0.51 [95% CI 0.30-0.73], P<0.001). ADT improved the cancer-specific survival (CSS) of RP based on a case-controlled study; added ADT to RT failed to challenge the position of RP but could improve the outcome of RT. In conclusions,RP/(RT plus adjuvant ADT) could both be used for the first-line therapy of high-risk PCa. When encountering an individual patient, urologists should consider various factors like tumors themselves, preferences of individuals, and so on.
Topics: Combined Modality Therapy; Humans; Male; Prostatic Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors; Survival Analysis; Treatment Outcome; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 25578739
DOI: 10.1038/srep07713 -
International Journal of Urology :... Mar 2016It is worth distinguishing between the two strategies of expectant management for prostate cancer. Watchful waiting entails administering non-curative androgen... (Review)
Review
It is worth distinguishing between the two strategies of expectant management for prostate cancer. Watchful waiting entails administering non-curative androgen deprivation therapy to patients on development of symptomatic progression, whereas active surveillance entails delivering curative treatment on signs of disease progression. The objectives of the two management strategies and the patients enrolled in either are different: (i) to review the role of active surveillance as a management strategy for patients with low-risk prostate cancer; and (ii) review the benefits and pitfalls of active surveillance. We carried out a systematic review of active surveillance for prostate cancer in the literature using the National Center for Biotechnology Information's electronic database, PubMed. We carried out a search in English using the terms: active surveillance, prostate cancer, watchful waiting and conservative management. Selected studies were required to have a comprehensive description of the demographic and disease characteristics of the patients at the time of diagnosis, inclusion criteria for surveillance, and a protocol for the patients' follow up. Review articles were included, but not multiple papers from the same datasets. Active surveillance appears to reduce overtreatment in patients with low-risk prostate cancer without compromising cancer-specific survival at 10 years. Therefore, active surveillance is an option for select patients who want to avoid the side-effects inherent to the different types of immediate treatment. However, inclusion criteria for active surveillance and the most appropriate method of monitoring patients on active surveillance have not yet been standardized.
Topics: Androgen Antagonists; Androgens; Disease Progression; Humans; Male; Medical Overuse; Neoplasm Grading; Prostate; Prostate-Specific Antigen; Prostatic Neoplasms; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 26621054
DOI: 10.1111/iju.13016 -
BJU International Jan 2018Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) is an effective treatment for men with advanced prostate cancer, but loss of bone mineral density (BMD) is a major risk factor for... (Review)
Review
Systematic review and network meta-analysis on the relative efficacy of osteoporotic medications: men with prostate cancer on continuous androgen-deprivation therapy to reduce risk of fragility fractures.
Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) is an effective treatment for men with advanced prostate cancer, but loss of bone mineral density (BMD) is a major risk factor for fractures. This review compared the efficacy of available treatments to provide prescribing guidance to healthcare professionals. This is the first review to compare the effectiveness of different osteoporotic treatments (bisphosphonates, denosumab, toremifene, and raloxifene) on BMD in patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer on ADT using network meta-analysis. Results suggest that all evaluated treatments are effective in improving BMD compared to placebo. Zoledronic acid (ZA) was found to have a greater improvement in BMD compared to other active treatments at all three studied sites, except for risedronate, which had better BMD improvement compared to ZA at the femoral neck site in one small study. Our study did not identify evidence that one drug is unequivocally more effective than another. All drugs appeared to be effective in reducing the rate of bone loss. Healthcare professionals should also consider patient preference, costs, and local availability as part of the decision process.
Topics: Absorptiometry, Photon; Aged; Androgen Antagonists; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Diphosphonates; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Invasiveness; Neoplasm Staging; Network Meta-Analysis; Osteoporosis; Osteoporotic Fractures; Prognosis; Prostatic Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28921820
DOI: 10.1111/bju.14015 -
PloS One 2013The retinoic acid receptor beta2(RARβ2) is a type of nuclear receptor that is activated by both all-trans retinoic acid and 9-cis retinoic acid, which has been shown to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The retinoic acid receptor beta2(RARβ2) is a type of nuclear receptor that is activated by both all-trans retinoic acid and 9-cis retinoic acid, which has been shown to function as a tumor suppressor gene in different types of human tumors. Previous reports demonstrated that the frequency of RARβ2 methylation was significantly higher in prostate cancer patients compared with controls, but the relationship between RARβ2 promoter methylation and pathological stage or Gleason score of prostate cancer remained controversial. Therefore, a meta-analysis of published studies investigating the effects of RARβ2 methylation status in prostate cancer occurrence and association with both pathological stage and Gleason score in prostate cancer was performed in the study. A total of 12 eligible studies involving 777 cases and 404 controls were included in the pooled analyses. Under the random-effects model, the pooled OR of RARβ2 methylation in prostate cancer patients, compared to non-cancer controls, was 17.62 with 95%CI = 6.30-49.28. The pooled OR with the fixed-effects model of pathological stage in RASSF1A methylated patients, compared to unmethylated patients, was 0.67 (95%CI = 0.40-1.09) and the pooled OR of low-GS in RARβ2 methylated patients by the random-effect model, compared to high-GS RARβ2 methylated patients, was 0.54 (95%CI = 0.28-1.04). This study showed that RARβ2 might be a potential biomarker in prostate cancer prevention and diagnosis. The detection of RARβ2 methylation in urine or serum is a potential non-invasive diagnostic tool in prostate cancer. The present findings also require confirmation through adequately designed prospective studies.
Topics: Biomarkers, Tumor; Case-Control Studies; DNA Methylation; Databases, Bibliographic; Humans; Male; Models, Statistical; Neoplasm Staging; Promoter Regions, Genetic; Prostatic Neoplasms; Receptors, Retinoic Acid; Tumor Suppressor Proteins
PubMed: 23675444
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0062950 -
European Urology Oncology Apr 2020Different nonsurgical therapeutic strategies can be adopted for intraprostatic relapse of prostate cancer after primary radiotherapy, including re-irradiation (with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CONTEXT
Different nonsurgical therapeutic strategies can be adopted for intraprostatic relapse of prostate cancer after primary radiotherapy, including re-irradiation (with brachytherapy [BT] or external beam radiotherapy [EBRT]), high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), and cryotherapy. The main issues to consider when choosing nonsurgical salvage local therapies are local tumor control and significant genitourinary toxicity.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the role of nonsurgical salvage modalities in patients with radiorecurrent prostate cancer and associated clinical outcomes and toxicity profiles.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We performed a critical review of the Medline, Scopus, and ClinicalKey databases from January 1, 2000 through February 1, 2018 according to the Preferred Reporting Items and Meta-Analyses statement. To assess the overall quality of the literature reviewed, we used a modified Delphi tool for case-series studies.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
A total of 64 case-series studies were included, corresponding to a cohort of 5585 patients. The modified Delphi checklist evidenced high methodological quality overall (mean quality score of 80.6%). Biochemical control rates were lowest for patients treated with HIFU (58%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 47-68%) and highest for patients treated with BT (69%, 95% CI 62-76%) and EBRT (69%, 95% CI 53-83%). The lowest prevalence of incontinence was for patients treated with BT (3%, 95% CI 0-6%; I=63.4%) and the highest was among patients treated with HIFU (28%, 95% CI 19-38%; I=89.7%).
CONCLUSIONS
Nonsurgical therapeutic options, especially BT, showed good outcomes in terms of biochemical control and tolerability in the local recurrence setting.
PATIENT SUMMARY
The current analysis demonstrated that nonsurgical salvage local therapies offer a chance of a curative local approach in radiorecurrent prostate cancer. However, high-quality data from prospective trials are needed to validate long-term outcomes from nonsurgical strategies for the treatment of intraprostatic recurrence after previous radiotherapy.
Topics: Humans; Male; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Prostatic Neoplasms; Salvage Therapy
PubMed: 31411996
DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.12.011 -
European Urology Aug 2017It remains unclear whether patients with a suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa) and negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) can safely obviate prostate... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
What Is the Negative Predictive Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Excluding Prostate Cancer at Biopsy? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis from the European Association of Urology Prostate Cancer Guidelines Panel.
CONTEXT
It remains unclear whether patients with a suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa) and negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) can safely obviate prostate biopsy.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the literature assessing the negative predictive value (NPV) of mpMRI in patients with a suspicion of PCa.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
The Embase, Medline, and Cochrane databases were searched up to February 2016. Studies reporting prebiopsy mpMRI results using transrectal or transperineal biopsy as a reference standard were included. We further selected for meta-analysis studies with at least 10-core biopsies as the reference standard, mpMRI comprising at least T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted imaging, positive mpMRI defined as a Prostate Imaging Reporting Data System/Likert score of ≥3/5 or ≥4/5, and results reported at patient level for the detection of overall PCa or clinically significant PCa (csPCa) defined as Gleason ≥7 cancer.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
A total of 48 studies (9613 patients) were eligible for inclusion. At patient level, the median prevalence was 50.4% (interquartile range [IQR], 36.4-57.7%) for overall cancer and 32.9% (IQR, 28.1-37.2%) for csPCa. The median mpMRI NPV was 82.4% (IQR, 69.0-92.4%) for overall cancer and 88.1% (IQR, 85.7-92.3) for csPCa. NPV significantly decreased when cancer prevalence increased, for overall cancer (r=-0.64, p<0.0001) and csPCa (r=-0.75, p=0.032). Eight studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. Seven reported results for overall PCa. When the overall PCa prevalence increased from 30% to 60%, the combined NPV estimates decreased from 88% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 77-99%) to 67% (95% CI, 56-79%) for a cut-off score of 3/5. Only one study selected for meta-analysis reported results for Gleason ≥7 cancers, with a positive biopsy rate of 29.3%. The corresponding NPV for a cut-off score of ≥3/5 was 87.9%.
CONCLUSIONS
The NPV of mpMRI varied greatly depending on study design, cancer prevalence, and definitions of positive mpMRI and csPCa. As cancer prevalence was highly variable among series, risk stratification of patients should be the initial step before considering prebiopsy mpMRI and defining those in whom biopsy may be omitted when the mpMRI is negative.
PATIENT SUMMARY
This systematic review examined if multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan can be used to reliably predict the absence of prostate cancer in patients suspected of having prostate cancer, thereby avoiding a prostate biopsy. The results suggest that whilst it is a promising tool, it is not accurate enough to replace prostate biopsy in such patients, mainly because its accuracy is variable and influenced by the prostate cancer risk. However, its performance can be enhanced if there were more accurate ways of determining the risk of having prostate cancer. When such tools are available, it should be possible to use an MRI scan to avoid biopsy in patients at a low risk of prostate cancer.
Topics: Biopsy; Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Europe; Humans; Male; Neoplasm Grading; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Predictive Value of Tests; Prostatic Neoplasms; Reproducibility of Results; Societies, Medical; Unnecessary Procedures; Urology
PubMed: 28336078
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.02.026 -
Health Technology Assessment... Oct 2010Prostate cancer (PC) is the most common cancer in men in the UK. Radiotherapy (RT) is a recognised treatment for PC and high-dose conformal radiotherapy (CRT) is the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Prostate cancer (PC) is the most common cancer in men in the UK. Radiotherapy (RT) is a recognised treatment for PC and high-dose conformal radiotherapy (CRT) is the recommended standard of care for localised or locally advanced tumours. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) allows better dose distributions in RT.
OBJECTIVE
This report evaluates the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of IMRT for the radical treatment of PC.
DATA SOURCES
The following databases were searched: MEDLINE (1950-present), EMBASE (1980-present), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (1982-present), BIOSIS (1985-present), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (1991-present), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (1991-present), the Science Citation Index (1900-present) and the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination databases (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Health Technology Assessment) (1991-present). MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations was searched to identify any studies not yet indexed on MEDLINE. Current research was identified through searching the UK Clinical Research Network, National Research Register archive, the Current Controlled Trials register and the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Register. In addition, abstracts of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, and European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology conferences were browsed.
REVIEW METHODS
A systematic literature review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of IMRT in PC was conducted. Comparators were three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) or radical prostatectomy. Outcomes sought were overall survival, biochemical [prostate-specific antigen (PSA)] relapse-free survival, toxicity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Fifteen electronic bibliographic databases were searched in January 2009 and updated in May 2009, and the reference lists of relevant articles were checked. Studies only published in languages other than English were excluded. An economic model was developed to examine the cost-effectiveness of IMRT in comparison to 3DCRT. Four scenarios were modelled based on the studies which reported both PSA survival and late gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. In two scenarios equal PSA survival was assumed for IMRT and 3DCRT, the other two having greater PSA survival for the IMRT cohort. As there was very limited data on clinical outcomes, the model estimates progression to clinical failure and PC death from the surrogate outcome of PSA failure.
RESULTS
No randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of IMRT versus 3DCRT in PC were available, but 13 non-randomised studies comparing IMRT with 3DCRT were found, of which five were available only as abstracts. One abstract reported overall survival. Biochemical relapse-free survival was not affected by treatment group, except where there was a dose difference between groups, in which case higher dose IMRT was favoured over lower dose 3DCRT. Most studies reported an advantage for IMRT in GI toxicity, attributed to increased conformality of treatment compared with 3DCRT, particularly with regard to volume of rectum treated. There was some indication that genitourinary toxicity was worse for patients treated with dose escalated IMRT, although most studies did not find a significant treatment effect. HRQoL improved for both treatment groups following radiotherapy, with any group difference resolved by 6 months after treatment. No comparative studies of IMRT versus prostatectomy were identified. No comparative studies of IMRT in PC patients with bone metastasis were identified.
LIMITATIONS
The strength of the conclusions of this review are limited by the lack of RCTs, and any comparative studies for some patient groups.
CONCLUSIONS
The comparative data of IMRT versus 3DCRT seem to support the theory that higher doses, up to 81 Gy, can improve biochemical survival for patients with localised PC, concurring with data on CRT. The data also suggest that toxicity can be reduced by increasing conformality of treatment, particularly with regard to GI toxicity, which can be more easily achieved with IMRT than 3DCRT. Whether differences in GI toxicity between IMRT and 3DCRT are sufficient for IMRT to be cost-effective is uncertain, depending on the difference in incidence of GI toxicity, its duration and the cost difference between IMRT and 3DCRT.
Topics: Adult; Age Factors; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Models, Economic; Neoplasm Staging; Prostatic Neoplasms; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated; State Medicine; Statistics as Topic; Survivors; Treatment Outcome; United Kingdom
PubMed: 21029717
DOI: 10.3310/hta14470