Just to build on what Steve wrote, even a recent study might be based on much-older data, and a lit review, even more so. So if you see a publication date like 2020, don't assume that they're actually talking about what the situation was like just 5 years ago; they might be reporting on a trial that started in 2008, or (if a lit review) analysing secondary data in other papers that are themselves 10+ years old, based on data collected 20+ years ago.

So much has changed in prostate-cancer treatment recently that any research paper based on observations collected before (say) 2018–20 has little to do with our survival prospects now, even if it was just published and is helpful for researchers and practitioners in other ways.

I'd like to re-emphasize Steve's warning about Doctor Google. There is so much garbage out there on the internet that it's really easy to get led astray.

For years now, I've tried to convince my wife (who has multiple health issues) to be more discerning in where she gets her online information. "Look at Mayo, look at Hopkins, look at Cleveland Clinic, look at Harvard Med ..."

She has a heart procedure coming up in a couple of weeks, and I was so pleased to hear her tell me this morning, "I was looking at information about the procedure at the Johns Hopkins website, and I have some questions for the doctor."

Tons of "information" out there, but you need to be selective.