Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26497969›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2016

The prognostic impact of squamous and glandular differentiation for upper tract urothelial carcinoma patients after radical nephroureterectomy.

Qi Tang, Gengyan Xiong, Xuesong Li, Dong Fang, Chenguang Xi, Lei Zhang, Kaiwei Yang, Lin Yao, Cuijian Zhang, Wei Yu and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Observational
  16. Clinicopathologic analysis of upper urinary tract carcinoma with variant histology.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Qi TangDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China.
Gengyan XiongDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China.
Xuesong LiDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China. pineneedle@sina.com.
Dong FangDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China.
Chenguang XiDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China.
Lei ZhangDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China.
Kaiwei YangDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China.
Lin YaoDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China.
Cuijian ZhangDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China.
Wei YuDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China.
Qun HeDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China.
Kan GongDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China.
Zhisong HeDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China.
Liqun ZhouDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China. zhoulqmail@sina.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the association between tumor squamous and/or glandular differentiation and tumor biological characteristics and to validate the impact of these histologic variants on oncologic outcomes of UTUC patients.

methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the data of 687 UTUC patients who underwent radical nephroureterectomy in our institute, from Aug 1, 1999, to Dec 31, 2011. All pathologic sections were reevaluated for histologic differentiation variations (squamous and glandular). The clinicopathological variables of patients were reviewed.

resultsAmong the 687 UTUC patients in our study, 53 (7.7 %) had squamous differentiation, 20 (2.9 %) had glandular differentiation and 8 (1.2 %) had both histologic variants. Patients with mixed histologic variant tended to have significant larger percentage of sessile tumor architecture (58.0 vs 18.2 %), presence of CIS (7.4 vs 2.3 %), advanced T stage, advanced tumor grade and lymph node metastasis (17.3 vs 6.6 %; all p < 0.05). Patients with squamous and/or glandular differentiation had significant worse cancer-specific survival than pure UTUC patients (p < 0.001), while significant difference of recurrence-free survival between two groups was not observed (p = 0.126). Patients with both squamous and glandular differentiation did not show significantly worse CSS than those with single histologic variant. Univariate analyses revealed that tumor squamous and/or glandular differentiation was a significant factor on survival (p < 0.001). However, the influence did not remain significant after adjusted for other factors in the multivariate analyses (p = 0.076, HR 1.42).

conclusionsUTUC patients with squamous and/or glandular differentiation are more likely to have aggressive tumor biological features and tend to have worse postoperative outcomes.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overCarcinoma, Transitional CellFemaleHumansKidney NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedNephrectomyPrognosisRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateUreteral NeoplasmsYoung AdultHistologic differentiationPrognosisUpper tract urothelial carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID26497969

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.