↓ Skip to main content

Radiation with or without Antiandrogen Therapy in Recurrent Prostate Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in New England Journal of Medicine, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
504 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
500 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Radiation with or without Antiandrogen Therapy in Recurrent Prostate Cancer
Published in
New England Journal of Medicine, February 2017
DOI 10.1056/nejmoa1607529
Pubmed ID
Authors

William U Shipley, Wendy Seiferheld, Himanshu R Lukka, Pierre P Major, Niall M Heney, David J Grignon, Oliver Sartor, Maltibehn P Patel, Jean-Paul Bahary, Anthony L Zietman, Thomas M Pisansky, Kenneth L Zeitzer, Colleen A F Lawton, Felix Y Feng, Richard D Lovett, Alexander G Balogh, Luis Souhami, Seth A Rosenthal, Kevin J Kerlin, James J Dignam, Stephanie L Pugh, Howard M Sandler

Abstract

Background Salvage radiation therapy is often necessary in men who have undergone radical prostatectomy and have evidence of prostate-cancer recurrence signaled by a persistently or recurrently elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level. Whether antiandrogen therapy with radiation therapy will further improve cancer control and prolong overall survival is unknown. Methods In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted from 1998 through 2003, we assigned 760 eligible patients who had undergone prostatectomy with a lymphadenectomy and had disease, as assessed on pathological testing, with a tumor stage of T2 (confined to the prostate but with a positive surgical margin) or T3 (with histologic extension beyond the prostatic capsule), no nodal involvement, and a detectable PSA level of 0.2 to 4.0 ng per milliliter to undergo radiation therapy and receive either antiandrogen therapy (24 months of bicalutamide at a dose of 150 mg daily) or daily placebo tablets during and after radiation therapy. The primary end point was the rate of overall survival. Results The median follow-up among the surviving patients was 13 years. The actuarial rate of overall survival at 12 years was 76.3% in the bicalutamide group, as compared with 71.3% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.59 to 0.99; P=0.04). The 12-year incidence of death from prostate cancer, as assessed by means of central review, was 5.8% in the bicalutamide group, as compared with 13.4% in the placebo group (P<0.001). The cumulative incidence of metastatic prostate cancer at 12 years was 14.5% in the bicalutamide group, as compared with 23.0% in the placebo group (P=0.005). The incidence of late adverse events associated with radiation therapy was similar in the two groups. Gynecomastia was recorded in 69.7% of the patients in the bicalutamide group, as compared with 10.9% of those in the placebo group (P<0.001). Conclusions The addition of 24 months of antiandrogen therapy with daily bicalutamide to salvage radiation therapy resulted in significantly higher rates of long-term overall survival and lower incidences of metastatic prostate cancer and death from prostate cancer than radiation therapy plus placebo. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and AstraZeneca; RTOG 9601 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00002874 .).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 250 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 500 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 492 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 103 21%
Other 64 13%
Student > Postgraduate 44 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 40 8%
Student > Bachelor 39 8%
Other 111 22%
Unknown 99 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 280 56%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 1%
Engineering 7 1%
Other 33 7%
Unknown 133 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 383. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 December 2022.
All research outputs
#81,687
of 25,632,496 outputs
Outputs from New England Journal of Medicine
#2,242
of 32,572 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,024
of 426,119 outputs
Outputs of similar age from New England Journal of Medicine
#50
of 272 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,632,496 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,572 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 122.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 426,119 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 272 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.