ArticleDer Urologe. Ausg. A2003
[Interdisciplinary oncologic after-care exemplified by second primary tumors after bladder carcinoma].
Article in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patients with localised prostate cancer (t1 - t2) show improved overall long-term survival compared to the normal population.Journal of Cancer · 2011Article
- Is there evidence for a multidisciplinary follow-up after urological cancer? An evaluation of subsequent cancers.World journal of urology · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The primary intention of oncological follow-up for patients with bladder cancer is the early diagnosis of recurrent local tumors or metastatic disease. The question of subsequent independent tumors has not been assessed as very important. Data from the central cancer registry of Regensburg/Germany for the period 1990-1997 were examined to determine the risk of second primary cancers following an initial bladder cancer. Records of 921 males (mean age: 65.4 years) and 339 females (mean age: 68.0 years) with the primary diagnosis of bladder cancer were analyzed. The minimal follow-up has been 5 years. Bladder cancer patients experience an excess risk of subsequent independent malignancies. The ratio of observed cases to expected cases of subsequent tumors was increased. During the follow-up period, subsequent tumors have been found in 153 (16.6%) male patients and 35 (10.3%) female patients. The most common subsequent malignancies in males were prostate cancer (71 cases) and bronchial cancer (19 cases). Breast cancer (nine cases) and colon cancer were predominant in females. This confirms the good sense of regular oncological follow-up. In this context attention should be directed at tumors of non urological origin, and an interdisciplinary approach with an individual oncological follow-up seems to be useful. The focus should be on the prostate and lung for males and the breast and colon for females.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.