ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2014
[Radical cancer surgery of renal cell and prostate carcinoma with hematogenous metastasis: benefits].
Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2014. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of survival of patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma after radical cytoreductive nephrectomy versus no surgery: a seer analysis.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
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 therapeutic role of cytoreductive surgery for urogenital malignancies is controversially discussed in the literature. The current article critically reflects the potential impact of cytoreductive surgery in patients with renal cell cancer and prostate cancer with locoregional lymph node or systemic metastases based on a review of the literature and personal experience.Even in the era of molecular targeted therapies in metastatic renal cell cancer, cytoreductive radical nephrectomy seems to exert survival benefit when compared to systemic therapy alone if (1) patients demonstrate a good ECOG performance status, (2) exhibit good or intermediate prognosis according to the Heng criteria, (3) cerebral metastases have been excluded, and (4) >90% of the total cancer volume can be eliminated. Preliminary clinical studies suggest that neoadjuvant systemic treatment might be associated with a significantly reduced 1-year mortality rate.For prostate cancer cytoreductive radical prostatectomy is one of the guideline-recommended treatment options for men with intrapelvic lymph node metastases resulting in survival benefit when compared to androgen deprivation as monotherapy. Cytoreductive radical prostatectomy should be performed (1) in the presence of limited intrapelvic lymph node metastasis without bulky disease, (2) if complete resectability of the primary cancer and its metastasis can be achieved by extended radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy, (3) if the patient is included in a multimodality approach, and (4) if the life expectancy is > 10 years.The role of cytoreductive radical prostatectomy in men with osseous metastases remains unclear due to the lack of large clinical trials. Despite the presence of the first promising studies, it is not justified to perform cytoreductive radical prostatectomy outside clinical trials. Preliminary results from small studies indicate that patients with minimal metastatic burden, PSA decrease < 1.0 ng/ml following neoadjuvant ADT for 6 months and complete resectability of the tumor exhibit the best prognosis to benefit from this new surgical approach.
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.