ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2012
[Upper tract urothelial carcinoma. An update on clinical and pathological prognostic factors].
Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The prognostic impact of squamous and glandular differentiation for upper tract urothelial carcinoma patients after radical nephroureterectomy.World journal of urology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is an uncommon but potentially lethal disease. Accurate risk stratification remains a challenge owing to the difficulty of clinical staging. Identification of risk factors may lead to individualized treatment and patient counselling and holds the potential to improve outcome. A non-systematic PubMed/Medline literature research was performed to identify and summarize clinical and pathological risk factors and urine-based markers which are associated with clinical outcome. Although knowledge of potential prognostic factors has improved over the last 5 years the overall evidence on UTUC risk factors remains limited and prospective, randomized trials are still missing. Radical nephroureterectomy is currently standard treatment for high-grade and muscle invasive UTUC. Several clinical and pathological factors (e.g. stage, grade, age, hydronephrosis, lymphovascular invasion, tumor necrosis and architecture, delay between diagnosis and surgery) were identified to be associated with outcome. Urinary cytology and fluorescence in-situ hybridization are the most commonly used urinary markers. Prospective randomized controlled trials are urgently needed to identify new risk factors and assess the efficacy. The incorporation of such prognosticators into multivariable prediction models may help to guide decision-making with regard to type of treatment, performance of lymphadenectomy and consideration of neoadjuvant or adjuvant systemic therapy.
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.