Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men, and the vast majority of men who have it are diagnosed with early-stage, clinically localized prostate cancer (stage T1-T2). Because early-stage prostate cancer may never become symptomatic in many men, when and how to treat it often depends heavily on patient preference. In this project, the research team systematically identified and evaluated the evidence and, in a series of visuals, summarized the results when comparing treatment options for localized prostate cancer for five key outcomes.
This project explores the use of visual tools to convey complex information; as a result, the visualization focuses on evidence patterns across all patients, including a range of clinical subgroups defined by age, race, and Gleason score, which is a grading system used to help evaluate the prognosis of men with prostate cancer. However, individual patient and provider decision making requires careful consideration of such risk factors. While the visualizations do not depict evidence for clinical subgroups, they do allow users to link to specific studies in the database underlying the evidence map, serving as a resource for further exploration.
This evidence visualization presents the results from a review of efficacy and harms of treatments for localized prostate cancer. The visuals include:
- A summary of research volume, that is the number of publications for each treatment comparison
- Side-by-side comparisons of treatment outcomes for all-cause mortality, prostate cancer-specific mortality, urinary function, bowel function, and sexual function
Video: How Do I Use this Evidence Map and Visualization?
The size of the bubble indicates the number of scientific publications that cover these comparisons. Click on a bubble to see more details. Although this visual documents all eligible studies reporting on a variety of outcomes, subsequent graphics explore benefits and harms only for all-cause mortality, prostate-cancer mortality, urinary function, bowel function, and sexual function. These outcomes were selected because they are of high interest to physicians and patients. View data on other outcomes, and see which specific comparisons have evidence for these outcomes and which do not on this evidence heat map.
Methodology (Summary Report)
Viswanathan M, Patel S, Reddy S, et al. Comparing Treatments for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: Review and Evidence Visualization. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; December 2020. Prepared by RTI under Contract No. IDIQ-TO#11-RTI-EVIDENCEMAPAMPTESP.