ReviewDer Pathologe2014
[Importance of pathology for therapy planning of testicular germ cell tumors].
Review in Der Pathologe, 2014. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- [When is surgical resection of metastases in testicular germ cell tumors indicated and is there a scientific basis?]Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2017Review
- Article
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
Testicular tumors can be divided into germ cell tumors and sex cord stromal tumors. Malignant testicular germ cell tumors (TGCT) represent about 90-95 % of all testicular tumors and are the most common solid neoplasms in young men aged 20-40 years with an increasing incidence in industrialized countries. Treatment of TGCT is performed by an individual and risk-adapted approach taking primary tumor histology, histopathlogical and molecular prognostic risk factors, tumor stage and for metastasized tumors the response to systemic chemotherapy into consideration. Knowledge of the specific histopathology of the primary tumor and the prognostic factors is of utmost importance for the treating urologist and oncologist in order to avoid undertreatment or overtreatment. Established risk factors which have been validated in retrospective and prospective studies for clinical stage I non-seminomatous TGCT are the presence of vascular invasion and the percentage of embryonal carcinoma. In clinical stage I seminomas tumor size (> 4 cm) and presence of rete testis infiltration have been identified as risk factors in retrospective but not in prospective studies. Quantitative histopathology of the primary tumor is also important for the management of small residual masses following chemotherapy: if the masses are ≤ 1 cm, postchemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection is only indicated if the primary tumor contains ≥ 50 % teratoma. Quantitative pathohistology of the resected residual masses is of importance for the decision-making process of a consolidating chemotherapy which is only of benefit if the amount of vital cancer tissue is > 10 %. Resection of residual hepatic and thoracic masses is indispensable. For gonadal stromal tumors knowledge of atypical nuclear forms, increased rate of mitosis and increased growth fractions are important for therapy planning.
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.